RE: [PATCH v2 4/4] iio: accel: adxl372: add support for ADXL371

[Miclaus, Antoniu]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2026 1:05 PM
> To: Miclaus, Antoniu <Antoniu.Miclaus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hennerich, Michael
> <Michael.Hennerich@xxxxxxxxxx>; Schmitt, Marcelo
> <Marcelo.Schmitt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sa, Nuno <Nuno.Sa@xxxxxxxxxx>; David
> Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Petre Rodan
> <petre.rodan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Marques, Jorge
> <Jorge.Marques@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] iio: accel: adxl372: add support for ADXL371
> 
> [External]
> 
> On Fri, 6 Mar 2026 17:18:24 +0200
> Antoniu Miclaus <antoniu.miclaus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Add support for the Analog Devices ADXL371, a +-200g 3-axis MEMS
> > accelerometer sharing the same register map as the ADXL372 but with
> > different ODR values (320/640/1280/2560/5120 Hz vs
> 400/800/1600/3200/
> > 6400 Hz), different bandwidth values, and different timer scale
> > factors for activity/inactivity detection.
> >
> > Due to a silicon anomaly (er001) causing FIFO data misalignment on
> > all current ADXL371 silicon, FIFO and triggered buffer support is
> > disabled for the ADXL371 - only direct mode reads are supported.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Antoniu Miclaus <antoniu.miclaus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> A couple of small formatting things. Otherwise looks good to me.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c
> > index adb9e42653f1..7a1ee2fef618 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
> >  // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> >  /*
> > - * ADXL372 3-Axis Digital Accelerometer core driver
> > + * ADXL371/ADXL372 3-Axis Digital Accelerometer core driver
> >   *
> >   * Copyright 2018 Analog Devices Inc.
> >   */
> > @@ -182,6 +182,14 @@ enum adxl372_odr {
> >  	ADXL372_ODR_6400HZ,
> >  };
> >
> > +enum adxl371_odr {
> > +	ADXL371_ODR_320HZ,
> > +	ADXL371_ODR_640HZ,
> > +	ADXL371_ODR_1280HZ,
> > +	ADXL371_ODR_2560HZ,
> > +	ADXL371_ODR_5120HZ,
> Might be worth a
> 	ADXL371_ODR_NUM
> entry so you can size the array from it below.
> 
> > +};
> > +
> >  enum adxl372_bandwidth {
> >  	ADXL372_BW_200HZ,
> >  	ADXL372_BW_400HZ,
> > @@ -222,6 +230,37 @@ static const int adxl372_bw_freq_tbl[5] = {
> >  	200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200,
> >  };
> >
> > +static const int adxl371_samp_freq_tbl[5] = {
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_320HZ] = 320,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_640HZ] = 640,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_1280HZ] = 1280,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_2560HZ] = 2560,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_5120HZ] = 5120,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const int adxl371_bw_freq_tbl[5] = {
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_320HZ] = 160,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_640HZ] = 320,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_1280HZ] = 640,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_2560HZ] = 1280,
> > +	[ADXL371_ODR_5120HZ] = 2560,
> > +};
> Style wise, why not do the same for adxl372_bw_freq_tbl[] as here?
> I slightly prefer this style, but key is consistency so if you'd
> gone the other way for both that would have been fine as well.


I will do the same for adxl372_bw_freq_tbl[] as here.
Where do you think is the best place to put that, in patch 1? (introduce chip_info structure)

Thanks