Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] iio: Add channel for Position Relative

[Eugen Hristev]

On 15.04.2018 22:29, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:57:49 +0300
> Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Add new channel type for relative position on a pad.
> >
> > These type of analog sensor offers the position of a pen
> > on a touchpad, and is represented as a voltage, which can be
> > converted to a position on X and Y axis on the pad.
> > The channel will hand the relative position on the pad in both directions.
> >
> > The channel can then be consumed by a touchscreen driver or
> > read as-is for a raw indication of the touchpen on a touchpad.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> >   - modified channel name to relative position as suggested.
> >   - modified kernel version to 4.18 (presumable)
> >
> >   Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio | 12 ++++++++++++
> >   drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c         |  1 +
> >   include/uapi/linux/iio/types.h          |  1 +
> >   tools/iio/iio_event_monitor.c           |  2 ++
> >   4 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio
> > index 6a5f34b..42a9287 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio
> > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-iio
> > @@ -190,6 +190,18 @@ Description:
> >   		but should match other such assignments on device).
> >   		Units after application of scale and offset are m/s^2.
> >   
> > +What:		/sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:deviceX/in_positionrelative_x_raw
> > +What:		/sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:deviceX/in_positionrelative_y_raw
> > +KernelVersion:	4.18
> > +Contact:	linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > +Description:
> > +		Relative position in direction x or y on a pad (may be
> > +		arbitrarily assigned but should match other such assignments on
> > +		device).
> > +		Units after application of scale and offset are milli percents
> > +		from the pad's size in both directions. Should be calibrated by
> > +		the consumer.
> I know the milli percent comes form the humidity equivalent, but I wonder
> if we are right to follow that.  10^-5 is a pretty random base unit (though
> I got argued into it being a standard choice for humidity sensors IIRC...
>
> What do people think?  We could go with 1 for full range or just percent perhaps?
>
> I'm not that fussed about staying consistent with humidity - we are unlikely
> to end up with sensors doing both anytime soon so there shouldn't be
> any confusion...
>
> Jonathan
Hello Jonathan,

For my specific use case, percents are not enough, as this would mean 
the resolution will be pretty low. If we have a touchpanel of a higher 
resolution, having the position only ranged 0 to 100 is pretty bad.
Having millipercents means we can have a resolution up to 100,000 points 
in range, which is fine for the hardware as of this moment.
Of course, specific drivers reporting these channels can define a 
specific range if they desire (report just in the first percent if you 
wish (0-1000) or so, which would mean a lower resolution.
Centi-percent would work fine as well I believe (0-10,000 range), but to 
keep consistent with your suggestion regarding relative humidity, I 
picked this larger scale.
In my specific case, since we have a 12 bit ADC, range is 0-4096 for 
this value.
Calibrating these values to the actual size of the touchpanel is left 
for the consumer to do (map 4096x4096 to the actual resolution)

If you have a better idea than milli-percents I can change it, no problem.

Eugen
> > +
> >   [...]