Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] iio: adc: ad7192: Add aincom supply

[David Lechner]

On 4/14/24 8:58 AM, Alisa-Dariana Roman wrote:
> On 13.04.2024 22:10, David Lechner wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:12 AM Alisa-Dariana Roman
>> <alisadariana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> AINCOM should actually be a supply. If present and it has a non-zero
>>> voltage, the pseudo-differential channels are configured as single-ended
>>> with an offset. Otherwise, they are configured as differential channels
>>> between AINx and AINCOM pins.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alisa-Dariana Roman <alisa.roman@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/iio/adc/ad7192.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>   1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> ...
> 
>>> @@ -745,6 +746,9 @@ static int ad7192_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>>>                  /* Kelvin to Celsius */
>>
>> Not related to this patch, but I'm not a fan of the way the
>> temperature case writes over *val (maybe clean that up using a switch
>> statement instead in another patch while we are working on this?).
>> Adding the else if to this makes it even harder to follow.
>>
>>>                  if (chan->type == IIO_TEMP)
>>>                          *val -= 273 * ad7192_get_temp_scale(unipolar);
>>> +               else if (st->aincom_mv && chan->channel2 == -1)
>>
>> I think the logic should be !chan->differential instead of
>> chan->channel2 = -1 (more explanation on this below).
>>
>>> +                       *val += DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)st->aincom_mv * 1000000000,
>>> +                                                     st->scale_avail[gain][1]);
>>>                  return IIO_VAL_INT;
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> I am very grateful for your suggestions!
> 
>     case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OFFSET:
>         if (!unipolar)
>             *val = -(1 << (chan->scan_type.realbits - 1));
>         else
>             *val = 0;
>         switch(chan->type) {
>         case IIO_VOLTAGE:
>             if (st->aincom_mv && !chan->differential)
>                 *val += DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL((u64)st->aincom_mv * 1000000000,
>                                   st->scale_avail[gain][1]);
>             return IIO_VAL_INT;
>         /* Kelvin to Celsius */
>         case IIO_TEMP:
>             *val -= 273 * ad7192_get_temp_scale(unipolar);
>             return IIO_VAL_INT;
>         default:
>             return -EINVAL;
>         }
> 
> I added a switch because it looks neater indeed. But I would keep the if else for the unipolar in order not to have duplicate code. Is this alright?
> 


I didn't notice before that the temperature channel could also be
unipolor or bipolar, so yes this seems fine.