Re: [PATCH v7 1/1] iio/scmi: Adding support for IIO SCMI Based Sensors

[Jyoti Bhayana <jbhayana@google.com>]

Hi Christian,

Thanks for porting the driver to the new interface. I have commented
on changes in v7-0025-iio-scmi-port-driver-to-the-new-scmi_sensor_proto.patch.

Thanks,
Jyoti

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:13 AM Cristian Marussi
<cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I reposted my series on top of the take3 immutable branch from Jonathan
> at:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210316124903.35011-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com/T/#t
>
> You should have received an email regarding the relevant IIO SCMI patch
>
> v7-0025-iio-scmi-port-driver-to-the-new-scmi_sensor_proto.patch
>
> which includes the port of your v7 IIO SCMI driver to the new API, and moved
> also the notification registration to the probe phase to simplify it
> further.
>
> On my side I tested with some fake emulated sensors emitting periodic
> 100ms SENSOR_UPDATE notifs...and verifying that notifications are still
> dispatched and received fine. (values are just fakes)
>
> If you can have a look, comment and possibly Ack.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cristian
>
> ---
>
> (debian-arm64)root@debarm64:~# /root/iio_generic_buffer -a -c -1 -g -l 100 -N 0
> iio device number being used is 0
> trigger-less mode selected
> Enabling all channels
> Enabling: in_accel_x_en
> Enabling: in_accel_z_en
> Enabling: in_timestamp_en
> Enabling: in_accel_y_en
> -9465 -9457 -9449 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9464 -9456 -9448 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9463 -9455 -9447 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9462 -9454 -9446 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9461 -9453 -9445 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9460 -9452 -9444 6169807244683640832.000000
> -9459 -9451 -9443 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9458 -9450 -9442 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9457 -9449 -9441 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9456 -9448 -9440 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9455 -9447 -9439 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9454 -9446 -9438 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9453 -9445 -9437 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9452 -9444 -9436 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9451 -9443 -9435 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9450 -9442 -9434 7169807022831960064.000000
> -9449 -9441 -9433 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9448 -9440 -9432 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9447 -9439 -9431 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9446 -9438 -9430 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9445 -9437 -9429 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9444 -9436 -9428 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9443 -9435 -9427 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9442 -9434 -9426 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9441 -9433 -9425 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9440 -9432 -9424 8169806800980279296.000000
> -9439 -9431 -9423 9169807128884412416.000000
> -9438 -9430 -9422 9169807128884412416.000000
> -9437 -9429 -9421 9169807128884412416.000000
> -9436 -9428 -9420 9169807128884412416.000000
> -9435 -9427 -9419 9169807128884412416.000000
> ^CCaught signal 2
> Disabling: in_accel_x_en
> Disabling: in_accel_z_en
> Disabling: in_timestamp_en
> Disabling: in_accel_y_en
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:47:25AM -0700, Jyoti Bhayana wrote:
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > No worries. Thanks for the update. It looks good now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jyoti
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:40 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 11:55:39 -0800
> > > Jyoti Bhayana <jbhayana@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jonathan,
> > > >
> > > > I still see the old version 6 in ib-iio-scmi-5.12-rc2-take2 as well.
> > >
> > > OK. I'm completely confused as to what is going with my local tree.
> > > I have the right patch in the history but it didn't end up in the final
> > > pushed out version.  Fat finger mess-up I guess and too many similarly named
> > > branches and the fact I didn't check the final result closely enough.
> > >
> > > There is now an ib-iio-scmi-5.12-rc2-take3 branch
> > >
> > > This time it definitely has your patch from the 9th of March with no
> > > instances of long long in it.
> > >
> > > Sorry I messed this one up (again!)
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Jyoti
> > >