Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
Am 14.11.2017 05:56 schrieb harinath Nampally: Hi Martin, But given your concerns, I would strip down this patch to only offer the already documented "low_noise" and "low_power" modes. It wouldn't be worth it to extend the ABI just because of this! OK then we can map 'low_noise' to high resolution mode. But I am afraid I can't test the functionality because I don't have proper instruments to measure the current draw(in microAmps) accurately. I would like "oversampling" more than this "power_mode" too. For this driver it would be far more complicated to implement though. I doubt that it'll be done. power_mode is basically already there implicitely, and given that there *is* the ABI, we could offer it for free. I think 'oversampling' is already implemented, as I see 'case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OVERSAMPLING_RATIO:' being handled which is basically setting the all 4 different power modes. If we also add 'power_mode', I think it would be like having two different user interfaces for same functionality. So I don't see much of value adding 'power_mode' as well. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks, Harinath You're right. I should've looked more closely. oversampling is there and seems to work. No need to blow up this driver or let alone extend an ABI now. Let's drop this patch. thanks martin On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote: On 2017-11-11 01:33, Jonathan Cameron wrote: On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:19:58 +0100 Martin Kepplinger wrote: This adds the power_mode sysfs interface to the device as documented in sysfs-bus-iio. --- Note that I explicitely don't sign off on this. This is a starting point for anybody who can test it and check for correct API usage, and ABI correctness, as documented in Documentation/ABI/testing/sys-bus-iio (grep it for "power_mode"). The ABI doc probably would need an addition too, if the 4 power modes here seem generally useful (there are only 2 listed there)! So, if you can test this, feel free to set up a proper patch or two, and I'm happy to review. Please note that this patch is quite old. It really should be that simple as far as my understanding back then. We always list the available frequencies of the given power mode we are in, for example, already, and everything basically is in place except for the user interface. Hmm. A lot of devices support something along these lines. The issue has always been - how is userspace to figure out what to do with it? It's all very vague... Funnily enough - this used to be really common, but is becoming less so now - presumably because no one was using it much (or maybe I am reading too much into that ;) Now the question is whether it can be tied to better defined things? Here low noise restricts the range to 4g. Issue is that we don't actually have writeable _available attributes (which correspond to range in this case). Does it? Isn't it merely less oversampling. Low power mode... This one is apparently oversampling. If possible support it as that as we have well defined interfaces for that. Jonathan. Ah, I remember; the oversampling settings was actually a reason why I hadn't submitted the patch :) The oversampling API would definitely be more accurate. I would like "oversampling" more than this "power_mode" too. For this driver it would be far more complicated to implement though. I doubt that it'll be done. power_mode is basically already there implicitely, and given that there *is* the ABI, we could offer it for free. But given your concerns, I would strip down this patch to only offer the already documented "low_noise" and "low_power" modes. It wouldn't be worth it to extend the ABI just because of this! Users would have a simple switch if they don't really *want* to know the details. I think it can be useful to just say "I don't care about power consuption. Be as accurate as possible" or "I just want this think to work. Use a little power as possible." Sure it's vage, but would it be useless?
Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
Hi Martin, > But given your concerns, I would strip down this patch to only offer the > already documented "low_noise" and "low_power" modes. It wouldn't be > worth it to extend the ABI just because of this! OK then we can map 'low_noise' to high resolution mode. But I am afraid I can't test the functionality because I don't have proper instruments to measure the current draw(in microAmps) accurately. > I would like "oversampling" more than this "power_mode" too. For this > driver it would be far more complicated to implement though. I doubt > that it'll be done. power_mode is basically already there implicitely, > and given that there *is* the ABI, we could offer it for free. I think 'oversampling' is already implemented, as I see 'case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OVERSAMPLING_RATIO:' being handled which is basically setting the all 4 different power modes. If we also add 'power_mode', I think it would be like having two different user interfaces for same functionality. So I don't see much of value adding 'power_mode' as well. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks, Harinath On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote: > On 2017-11-11 01:33, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:19:58 +0100 >> Martin Kepplinger wrote: >> >>> This adds the power_mode sysfs interface to the device as documented in >>> sysfs-bus-iio. >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Note that I explicitely don't sign off on this. >>> >>> This is a starting point for anybody who can test it and check for correct >>> API usage, and ABI correctness, as documented in >>> Documentation/ABI/testing/sys-bus-iio >>> (grep it for "power_mode"). The ABI doc probably would need an addition >>> too, if the 4 power modes here seem generally useful (there are only >>> 2 listed there)! >>> >>> So, if you can test this, feel free to set up a proper patch or >>> two, and I'm happy to review. >>> >>> Please note that this patch is quite old. It really should be that simple >>> as far as my understanding back then. We always list the available >>> frequencies >>> of the given power mode we are in, for example, already, and everything >>> basically is in place except for the user interface. >> >> Hmm. A lot of devices support something along these lines. The issue >> has always been - how is userspace to figure out what to do with it? >> It's all very vague... >> >> Funnily enough - this used to be really common, but is becoming less so >> now - presumably because no one was using it much (or maybe I am reading >> too much into that ;) >> >> Now the question is whether it can be tied to better defined things? >> >> Here low noise restricts the range to 4g. Issue is that we don't actually >> have writeable _available attributes (which correspond to range in this >> case). >> > > Does it? Isn't it merely less oversampling. > >> Low power mode... This one is apparently oversampling. If possible support >> it as that as we have well defined interfaces for that. >> >> Jonathan. > > Ah, I remember; the oversampling settings was actually a reason why I > hadn't submitted the patch :) The oversampling API would definitely be > more accurate. > > I would like "oversampling" more than this "power_mode" too. For this > driver it would be far more complicated to implement though. I doubt > that it'll be done. power_mode is basically already there implicitely, > and given that there *is* the ABI, we could offer it for free. > > But given your concerns, I would strip down this patch to only offer the > already documented "low_noise" and "low_power" modes. It wouldn't be > worth it to extend the ABI just because of this! > > Users would have a simple switch if they don't really *want* to know the > details. I think it can be useful to just say "I don't care about power > consuption. Be as accurate as possible" or "I just want this think to > work. Use a little power as possible." Sure it's vage, but would it be > useless?
Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
On 2017-11-11 01:33, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:19:58 +0100 > Martin Kepplinger wrote: > >> This adds the power_mode sysfs interface to the device as documented in >> sysfs-bus-iio. >> >> --- >> >> Note that I explicitely don't sign off on this. >> >> This is a starting point for anybody who can test it and check for correct >> API usage, and ABI correctness, as documented in >> Documentation/ABI/testing/sys-bus-iio >> (grep it for "power_mode"). The ABI doc probably would need an addition >> too, if the 4 power modes here seem generally useful (there are only >> 2 listed there)! >> >> So, if you can test this, feel free to set up a proper patch or >> two, and I'm happy to review. >> >> Please note that this patch is quite old. It really should be that simple >> as far as my understanding back then. We always list the available >> frequencies >> of the given power mode we are in, for example, already, and everything >> basically is in place except for the user interface. > > Hmm. A lot of devices support something along these lines. The issue > has always been - how is userspace to figure out what to do with it? > It's all very vague... > > Funnily enough - this used to be really common, but is becoming less so > now - presumably because no one was using it much (or maybe I am reading > too much into that ;) > > Now the question is whether it can be tied to better defined things? > > Here low noise restricts the range to 4g. Issue is that we don't actually > have writeable _available attributes (which correspond to range in this case). > Does it? Isn't it merely less oversampling. > Low power mode... This one is apparently oversampling. If possible support > it as that as we have well defined interfaces for that. > > Jonathan. Ah, I remember; the oversampling settings was actually a reason why I hadn't submitted the patch :) The oversampling API would definitely be more accurate. I would like "oversampling" more than this "power_mode" too. For this driver it would be far more complicated to implement though. I doubt that it'll be done. power_mode is basically already there implicitely, and given that there *is* the ABI, we could offer it for free. But given your concerns, I would strip down this patch to only offer the already documented "low_noise" and "low_power" modes. It wouldn't be worth it to extend the ABI just because of this! Users would have a simple switch if they don't really *want* to know the details. I think it can be useful to just say "I don't care about power consuption. Be as accurate as possible" or "I just want this think to work. Use a little power as possible." Sure it's vage, but would it be useless?
Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 08:19:58 +0100
Martin Kepplinger wrote:
> This adds the power_mode sysfs interface to the device as documented in
> sysfs-bus-iio.
>
> ---
>
> Note that I explicitely don't sign off on this.
>
> This is a starting point for anybody who can test it and check for correct
> API usage, and ABI correctness, as documented in
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sys-bus-iio
> (grep it for "power_mode"). The ABI doc probably would need an addition
> too, if the 4 power modes here seem generally useful (there are only
> 2 listed there)!
>
> So, if you can test this, feel free to set up a proper patch or
> two, and I'm happy to review.
>
> Please note that this patch is quite old. It really should be that simple
> as far as my understanding back then. We always list the available frequencies
> of the given power mode we are in, for example, already, and everything
> basically is in place except for the user interface.
Hmm. A lot of devices support something along these lines. The issue
has always been - how is userspace to figure out what to do with it?
It's all very vague...
Funnily enough - this used to be really common, but is becoming less so
now - presumably because no one was using it much (or maybe I am reading
too much into that ;)
Now the question is whether it can be tied to better defined things?
Here low noise restricts the range to 4g. Issue is that we don't actually
have writeable _available attributes (which correspond to range in this case).
Low power mode... This one is apparently oversampling. If possible support
it as that as we have well defined interfaces for that.
Jonathan.
>
> thanks
> martin
>
>
>
> drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c | 37 +
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c b/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> index bfd4bc806fc2..640bbd9872ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> @@ -1166,6 +1166,41 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> .attrs = mma8452_event_attributes,
> };
>
> +static const char * const mma8452_power_modes[] = {"normal",
> +"low_noise_low_power",
> +"low_noise",
> +"low_power"};
> +
> +static int mma8452_get_power_mode_iio_enum(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> +const struct iio_chan_spec *chan)
> +{
> + struct mma8452_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +
> + return mma8452_get_power_mode(data);
> +}
> +
> +static int mma8452_set_power_mode_iio_enum(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> +const struct iio_chan_spec *chan,
> +unsigned int mode)
> +{
> + struct mma8452_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +
> + return mma8452_set_power_mode(data, mode);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct iio_enum mma8452_power_mode_enum = {
> + .items = mma8452_power_modes,
> + .num_items = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_power_modes),
> + .get = mma8452_get_power_mode_iio_enum,
> + .set = mma8452_set_power_mode_iio_enum,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info mma8452_ext_info[] = {
> + IIO_ENUM("power_mode", true, &mma8452_power_mode_enum),
> + IIO_ENUM_AVAILABLE("power_mode", &mma8452_power_mode_enum),
> + { },
> +};
> +
> #define MMA8452_FREEFALL_CHANNEL(modifier) { \
> .type = IIO_ACCEL, \
> .modified = 1, \
> @@ -1204,6 +1239,7 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> }, \
> .event_spec = mma8452_transient_event, \
> .num_event_specs = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_transient_event), \
> + .ext_info = mma8452_ext_info, \
> }
>
> #define MMA8652_CHANNEL(axis, idx, bits) { \
> @@ -1225,6 +1261,7 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> }, \
> .event_spec = mma8452_motion_event, \
> .num_event_specs = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_motion_event), \
> + .ext_info = mma8452_ext_info, \
> }
>
> static const struct iio_chan_spec mma8451_channels[] = {
Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
Am 09.11.2017 04:19 schrieb harinath Nampally: Hi Martin, Thanks for publishing the patch. I will work on it, but unfortunately I can't promise anything before 11/27. perfectly fine, this patch has been lying around here for at least a year, so there's no rush.
Re: [PATCH] iio: mma8452: add power_mode sysfs configuration
Hi Martin,
Thanks for publishing the patch.
I will work on it, but unfortunately I can't promise anything before 11/27.
Thanks,
Harinath
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
> This adds the power_mode sysfs interface to the device as documented in
> sysfs-bus-iio.
>
> ---
>
> Note that I explicitely don't sign off on this.
>
> This is a starting point for anybody who can test it and check for correct
> API usage, and ABI correctness, as documented in
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sys-bus-iio
> (grep it for "power_mode"). The ABI doc probably would need an addition
> too, if the 4 power modes here seem generally useful (there are only
> 2 listed there)!
>
> So, if you can test this, feel free to set up a proper patch or
> two, and I'm happy to review.
>
> Please note that this patch is quite old. It really should be that simple
> as far as my understanding back then. We always list the available frequencies
> of the given power mode we are in, for example, already, and everything
> basically is in place except for the user interface.
>
> thanks
> martin
>
>
>
> drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c | 37 +
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c b/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> index bfd4bc806fc2..640bbd9872ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c
> @@ -1166,6 +1166,41 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> .attrs = mma8452_event_attributes,
> };
>
> +static const char * const mma8452_power_modes[] = {"normal",
> + "low_noise_low_power",
> + "low_noise",
> + "low_power"};
> +
> +static int mma8452_get_power_mode_iio_enum(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> + const struct iio_chan_spec *chan)
> +{
> + struct mma8452_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +
> + return mma8452_get_power_mode(data);
> +}
> +
> +static int mma8452_set_power_mode_iio_enum(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> + const struct iio_chan_spec *chan,
> + unsigned int mode)
> +{
> + struct mma8452_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> +
> + return mma8452_set_power_mode(data, mode);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct iio_enum mma8452_power_mode_enum = {
> + .items = mma8452_power_modes,
> + .num_items = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_power_modes),
> + .get = mma8452_get_power_mode_iio_enum,
> + .set = mma8452_set_power_mode_iio_enum,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info mma8452_ext_info[] = {
> + IIO_ENUM("power_mode", true, &mma8452_power_mode_enum),
> + IIO_ENUM_AVAILABLE("power_mode", &mma8452_power_mode_enum),
> + { },
> +};
> +
> #define MMA8452_FREEFALL_CHANNEL(modifier) { \
> .type = IIO_ACCEL, \
> .modified = 1, \
> @@ -1204,6 +1239,7 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> }, \
> .event_spec = mma8452_transient_event, \
> .num_event_specs = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_transient_event), \
> + .ext_info = mma8452_ext_info, \
> }
>
> #define MMA8652_CHANNEL(axis, idx, bits) { \
> @@ -1225,6 +1261,7 @@ static struct attribute_group
> mma8452_event_attribute_group = {
> }, \
> .event_spec = mma8452_motion_event, \
> .num_event_specs = ARRAY_SIZE(mma8452_motion_event), \
> + .ext_info = mma8452_ext_info, \
> }
>
> static const struct iio_chan_spec mma8451_channels[] = {
> --
> 2.11.0
>
