| Message ID | 20161113183407.12848-1-hdegoede@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Hans, On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 07:34:07PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > commit ef3714fdbc8d ("Input: bma150 - extend chip detection for bma180"), > adds bma180 chip-ids to the input bma150 driver, assuming that they are > 100% compatible, but the bma180 is not compatible with the bma150 at all, > it has 14 bits resolution instead of 10, and it has quite different > control registers too. > > Treating the bma180 as a bma150 wrt its data registers will just result > in throwing away the lowest 4 bits, which is not too bad. But the ctrl > registers are a different story. Things happen to just work but supporting > that certainly does not make treating the bma180 the same as the bma150 > right. > > Since some setups depend on the evdev interface the bma150 driver offers > on top of the bma180, we cannot simply remove the bma180 ids. > > So this commit only removes the bma180 id when the bma180 iio driver, > which does treat the bma180 properly, is enabled. > > Cc: Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/input/misc/bma150.c | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c > index b0d4453..9fa1c9a 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c > +++ b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c > @@ -539,7 +539,11 @@ static int bma150_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > } > > chip_id = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BMA150_CHIP_ID_REG); > - if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID) { > + if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID > +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 > + && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID > +#endif Does not this break if bma180 is compiled as module? I'd rather we did if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID && (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BMA180) || chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID)) { ... > + ) { > dev_err(&client->dev, "BMA150 chip id error: %d\n", chip_id); > return -EINVAL; > } > @@ -643,7 +647,9 @@ static UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS(bma150_pm, bma150_suspend, bma150_resume, NULL); > > static const struct i2c_device_id bma150_id[] = { > { "bma150", 0 }, > +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 #if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BMA180) > { "bma180", 0 }, > +#endif > { "smb380", 0 }, > { "bma023", 0 }, > { } > -- > 2.9.3 > Thanks.
Hi, On 14-11-16 06:35, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 07:34:07PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> commit ef3714fdbc8d ("Input: bma150 - extend chip detection for bma180"), >> adds bma180 chip-ids to the input bma150 driver, assuming that they are >> 100% compatible, but the bma180 is not compatible with the bma150 at all, >> it has 14 bits resolution instead of 10, and it has quite different >> control registers too. >> >> Treating the bma180 as a bma150 wrt its data registers will just result >> in throwing away the lowest 4 bits, which is not too bad. But the ctrl >> registers are a different story. Things happen to just work but supporting >> that certainly does not make treating the bma180 the same as the bma150 >> right. >> >> Since some setups depend on the evdev interface the bma150 driver offers >> on top of the bma180, we cannot simply remove the bma180 ids. >> >> So this commit only removes the bma180 id when the bma180 iio driver, >> which does treat the bma180 properly, is enabled. >> >> Cc: Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> >> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/input/misc/bma150.c | 8 +++++++- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c >> index b0d4453..9fa1c9a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c >> @@ -539,7 +539,11 @@ static int bma150_probe(struct i2c_client *client, >> } >> >> chip_id = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BMA150_CHIP_ID_REG); >> - if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID) { >> + if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID >> +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 >> + && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID >> +#endif > > Does not this break if bma180 is compiled as module? I'd rather we did > > if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID && > (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BMA180) || chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID)) { > ... Yes using IS_ENABLED() is a good idea, both for readability and for the building as module reason. I'll send a v2. Regards, Hans > > >> + ) { >> dev_err(&client->dev, "BMA150 chip id error: %d\n", chip_id); >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> @@ -643,7 +647,9 @@ static UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS(bma150_pm, bma150_suspend, bma150_resume, NULL); >> >> static const struct i2c_device_id bma150_id[] = { >> { "bma150", 0 }, >> +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 > #if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BMA180) > >> { "bma180", 0 }, >> +#endif >> { "smb380", 0 }, >> { "bma023", 0 }, >> { } >> -- >> 2.9.3 >> > > Thanks. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c index b0d4453..9fa1c9a 100644 --- a/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c +++ b/drivers/input/misc/bma150.c @@ -539,7 +539,11 @@ static int bma150_probe(struct i2c_client *client, } chip_id = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, BMA150_CHIP_ID_REG); - if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID) { + if (chip_id != BMA150_CHIP_ID +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 + && chip_id != BMA180_CHIP_ID +#endif + ) { dev_err(&client->dev, "BMA150 chip id error: %d\n", chip_id); return -EINVAL; } @@ -643,7 +647,9 @@ static UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS(bma150_pm, bma150_suspend, bma150_resume, NULL); static const struct i2c_device_id bma150_id[] = { { "bma150", 0 }, +#ifndef CONFIG_BMA180 { "bma180", 0 }, +#endif { "smb380", 0 }, { "bma023", 0 }, { }
commit ef3714fdbc8d ("Input: bma150 - extend chip detection for bma180"), adds bma180 chip-ids to the input bma150 driver, assuming that they are 100% compatible, but the bma180 is not compatible with the bma150 at all, it has 14 bits resolution instead of 10, and it has quite different control registers too. Treating the bma180 as a bma150 wrt its data registers will just result in throwing away the lowest 4 bits, which is not too bad. But the ctrl registers are a different story. Things happen to just work but supporting that certainly does not make treating the bma180 the same as the bma150 right. Since some setups depend on the evdev interface the bma150 driver offers on top of the bma180, we cannot simply remove the bma180 ids. So this commit only removes the bma180 id when the bma180 iio driver, which does treat the bma180 properly, is enabled. Cc: Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> --- drivers/input/misc/bma150.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)