lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5] iio: accel: mma8452: improvements to handle multiple events
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 23:06:37 -0400
harinath Nampally <harinath922@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I agree with your understanding. It's a rising threshold, just that the input
> > will only reflect high frequency changes in the signal.
> Thank you for the clarification. I am hoping this gets merged in the
> next window if no other issues.

There is still the open question to Martin on what he meant in his
review to be addressed.

Martin, any comments on this?

I'm really looking for an OK from Martin before I take this one.
Plenty of time though given the merge window is still open!

I'm travelling this week so response may be a bit random depending
on conference wifi and how interesting the material is ;)

Jonathan

>
> Thanks,
> Hari
>
> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 23:01:16 -0400
> > harinath Nampally <harinath922@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > We should never say "transient is for rising
> >> > direction" or "ff_mt is for falling direction". any combination is fine.
> >>
> >> Ok I agree that there is no hard and fast rule that "transient is for rising
> >> direction" or "ff_mt is for falling direction".
> >> But in our case, datasheet for these chips define these events based on
> >> acceleration magnitude rising or falling below a set threshold value.
> >>
> >> For quick reference, below excerpts are from fxls8471 datasheet:
> >> Motion Event: "When the acceleration exceeds a set threshold for a set
> >> amount of time,
> >> the motion interrupt is asserted."
> >>
> >> Freefall event: "The detection of “Freefall” involves the monitoring
> >> of the X, Y, and Z axes
> >> for the condition where the acceleration magnitude is below a
> >> user-specified threshold
> >> for a user-definable amount of time"
> >>
> >> Transient event: "When the high-pass filter is bypassed, the
> >> functionality becomes
> >> similar to the motion-detection function; in this mode, acceleration
> >> greater than
> >> a programmable threshold is detected (along an axis)."
> >>
> >> Therefore I think in this driver freefall event is defined as
> >> 'falling' event type and
> >> motion event is defined as 'rising' event type and Transient is also defined as
> >> 'rising' event type.
> >> As you might already know that mma8562 and mma8563 doesn't have
> >> transient event support
> >> but they do have freefall and motion event support which are defined
> >> as 'fall' and 'rise'
> >> event types respectively. Please note in this driver, motion event is
> >> enabled/configured only
> >> for mma8652 and mma8653.
> >> Therefore if I read/write sysfs node for 'rise' it should use the
> >> FF_MT registers for mma8652 and mma853, but for all others like
> >> mma8451, mma8452 and
> >> mma8453 which has transient event support it picks the Transient
> >> registers if enabled. Also please
> >> note transient event is enabled(but not motion event) for mma8451,
> >> mma8452 and mma8453.
> >> The problem seems like we have two different events(motion and
> >> transient) that are defined
> >> as same event type 'rising' but in fact both motion and transient are
> >> pretty much similar as they
> >> both raise interrupt flag when the acceleration magnitude rises above
> >> the threshold.
> >> Only difference is transient event has its own event config registers
> >> with High pass filter.
> >> If HPF bypassed using config register transient event acts like motion
> >> detection event.
> >
> >>
> >> That was my understanding but please correct me if I am wrong.
> >
> > I agree with your understanding. It's a rising threshold, just that the input
> > will only reflect high frequency changes in the signal.
> >
> >>
> >> > Only freefall mode needs one fix: remembering to which set of registers to fall back when
> >> > disabling it.
> >>
> >> I don't quite understand what you mean by 'to fall back when disabling
> >> it'. Please elaborate. I would
> >> appreciate if you could suggest your logic in the form of pseudo-code.
> >> Thanks for your time
> >>
> > ...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-10 15:45    [W:0.055 / U:9.892 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site