Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iio: light: Add support for AL3000a illuminance sensor

[Svyatoslav Ryhel]

сб, 22 лют. 2025 р. о 14:05 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> пише:
>
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 16:32:33 +0200
> Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > пн, 17 лют. 2025 р. о 16:24 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> пише:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > > > +static int al3000a_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > > > > +                         struct iio_chan_spec const *chan, int *val,
> > > > > > +                         int *val2, long mask)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +     struct al3000a_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > > > > > +     int ret, gain;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +     switch (mask) {
> > > > > > +     case IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW:
> > > > > > +             ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, AL3000A_REG_DATA, &gain);
> > > > > > +             if (ret < 0)
> > > > > > +                     return ret;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +             *val = lux_table[gain & AL3000A_GAIN_MASK];
> > > > >
> > > > > I may have misinterpreted the other thread.  IS this value in lux?
> > > > > If it is make this channel IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED instead.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is actually a really good hint, I will check if this works out
> > > > and if yes, then definitely will use it. Thank you.
> > >
> > > From your other reply it seems we have no idea of the correct scaling.
> > > If that is the case, then channel type should be IIO_INTENSITY as
> > > I assume we also have no idea if the light sensitivity curve is
> > > matched to that required for illuminance (which approximates the
> > > sensitivity of the human eye). Various datasheets provide completely
> > > garbage conversion formulas btw so even if we have data this can
> > > be problematic. One recent sensor was using a green filter and
> > > saying illuminance in lux was 1.2 * green which was assuming their
> > > own definition of white light.
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> >
> > Then why IIO_LIGHT exists at all? If you state that datasheets provide
> > garbage formulas and sensors cannot be trusted and all is around human
> > eye, then why IIO_LIGHT is still the case? I did not recall any
> > drivers for human eyes (thank god). Please be more consistent. Thank
>
> It exists because some sensors do this correctly, or at least a good
> approximation to the standard sensitivity curves.  This is done two
> ways.
>
> 1. Good light frequency filtering in front of the sensor to compensate
>    for the difference in sensitivity between the measuring element
>    and that the standard curves.  CIE1931 (there are a few other standards
>    but they are close enough that we don't care).
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminance
> 2. Multiple sensing elements. A common reason for this is to remove
>    bit of infrared that we don't want. Often the calculation is a
>    non linear combination of the various sensor outputs. Such a driver
>    usually presents several IIO_INTENSITY channels and a calculated
>    IIO_LIGHT channel.
>
> In both cases the datasheet tends to include a comparison the the
> CIE1931 etc standards. There will be small differences but that is
> very different from taking a sensor that is only sensitive to green
> and weighting it which is the example I gave above.
>
> These sensors will compensate for the different sensivity
> of the human eye to different wavelengths.  E.g. if you
> think blue and green light LEDs have the same brightness then
> the sensor will give close to the same output.
>
> Anyhow, light sensors are a hole I have gone far too deep in over
> the years. Key is some manufacturers provide insufficient information
> or take the view it is a problem for the integrator of the sensor
> to deal with. For those we do not pretend to know the answer and
> use intensity channels instead.
>

This is quite an explicit explanation. Thank you.

> Jonathan
>
>
> > you
> >
>