lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/7] iio: light: vcnl4000: Add proximity ps_it for vcnl4200
On Tue, 9 May 2023 16:01:48 +0200
Astrid Rost <astrid.rost@axis.com> wrote:

> Add ps_it attributes for vcnl4200 (similar to vcnl4040).
> Add read/write attribute for proximity integration time.
> Read attribute for available proximity integration times.
> Change sampling rate depending on integration time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Astrid Rost <astrid.rost@axis.com>

Similar to previous patch, I'd prefer to move away from
code based selection of values for each type of device to data
based - with data stored in the existing chip_spec structures.

Thanks,

Jonathan

> ---
> drivers/iio/light/vcnl4000.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4000.c b/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4000.c
> index 13568454baff..e14475070ac3 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4000.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4000.c
> @@ -124,6 +124,15 @@ static const int vcnl4040_ps_it_times[][2] = {
> {0, 800},
> };
>
> +static const int vcnl4200_ps_it_times[][2] = {
> + {0, 96},
> + {0, 144},
> + {0, 192},
> + {0, 384},
> + {0, 768},
> + {0, 864},
> +};
> +
> #define VCNL4000_SLEEP_DELAY_MS 2000 /* before we enter pm_runtime_suspend */
>
> enum vcnl4000_device_ids {
> @@ -500,6 +509,16 @@ static int vcnl4000_set_pm_runtime_state(struct vcnl4000_data *data, bool on)
> static int vcnl4040_read_ps_it(struct vcnl4000_data *data, int *val, int *val2)
> {
> int ret;
> + const int(*ps_it_times)[][2];
> + int size;
> +
> + if (data->id == VCNL4200) {
> + ps_it_times = &vcnl4200_ps_it_times;
> + size = ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4200_ps_it_times);
> + } else {
> + ps_it_times = &vcnl4040_ps_it_times;
> + size = ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times);

See below. Same points hold (I tend to review upwards as I find it
easier to follow).

> + }
>
> ret = i2c_smbus_read_word_data(data->client, VCNL4200_PS_CONF1);
> if (ret < 0)
> @@ -507,11 +526,11 @@ static int vcnl4040_read_ps_it(struct vcnl4000_data *data, int *val, int *val2)
>
> ret = FIELD_GET(VCNL4040_PS_CONF2_PS_IT, ret);
>
> - if (ret >= ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times))
> + if (ret >= size)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - *val = vcnl4040_ps_it_times[ret][0];
> - *val2 = vcnl4040_ps_it_times[ret][1];
> + *val = (*ps_it_times)[ret][0];
> + *val2 = (*ps_it_times)[ret][1];
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -521,9 +540,19 @@ static ssize_t vcnl4040_write_ps_it(struct vcnl4000_data *data, int val)
> unsigned int i;
> int ret, index = -1;
> u16 regval;
> + const int(*ps_it_times)[][2];
> + int size;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times); i++) {
> - if (val == vcnl4040_ps_it_times[i][1]) {
> + if (data->id == VCNL4200) {
> + ps_it_times = &vcnl4200_ps_it_times;

As below. I'd like this to be data in chip_spec rather than code here.
That almost always ends up more flexible and compact in the long run as
support for more parts is added to a driver.

> + size = ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4200_ps_it_times);
> + } else {
> + ps_it_times = &vcnl4040_ps_it_times;
> + size = ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times);
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < size; i++) {
> + if (val == (*ps_it_times)[i][1]) {
> index = i;
> break;
> }
> @@ -532,6 +561,8 @@ static ssize_t vcnl4040_write_ps_it(struct vcnl4000_data *data, int val)
> if (index < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + data->vcnl4200_ps.sampling_rate = ktime_set(0, val * 60000);
> +
> mutex_lock(&data->vcnl4000_lock);
>
> ret = i2c_smbus_read_word_data(data->client, VCNL4200_PS_CONF1);
> @@ -619,11 +650,18 @@ static int vcnl4040_read_avail(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> const int **vals, int *type, int *length,
> long mask)
> {
> + struct vcnl4000_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +
> switch (mask) {
> case IIO_CHAN_INFO_INT_TIME:
> - *vals = (int *)vcnl4040_ps_it_times;
> + if (data->id == VCNL4200) {
> + *vals = (int *)vcnl4200_ps_it_times;
> + *length = 2 * ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4200_ps_it_times);

As for previous, I'd much rather this was 'data' in the chip_spec structure
than code selecting it here. That is I'd expect it to be arrange so this
part looks like.
*vals = (int *)data->chip_spec->int_times;
*length = 2 * data->chip_spec->num_int_times;

> + } else {
> + *vals = (int *)vcnl4040_ps_it_times;
> + *length = 2 * ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times);
> + }
> *type = IIO_VAL_INT_PLUS_MICRO;
> - *length = 2 * ARRAY_SIZE(vcnl4040_ps_it_times);
> return IIO_AVAIL_LIST;
> default:
> return -EINVAL;

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-05-14 19:11    [W:0.128 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site