Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1520278
| From | Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 16/28] staging: iio: tsl2583: updated code comment to match what the code does |
| Date | 2016-11-12 18:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sCJOP-4AL-41@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sBTQe-3Ic-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBTZU-3Mb-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sCJvs-4tA-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 04:36:37PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 10/11/16 09:25, Brian Masney wrote:
> > If channel 0 does not have any data, then the code sets the lux to zero.
> > The corresponding comment says that the last value is returned. This
> > updates the comment to correctly reflect what the code does.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org>
> Better perhaps to just return an error, -EAGAIN perhaps?
> I'm not sure why it would not give a value.
This check is to avoid a division by zero. Here is the relevant code
that wasn't shown in the diff:
if (!ch0) {
/* have no data, so return 0 */
ret = 0;
chip->als_cur_info.lux = 0;
goto done;
}
/* calculate ratio */
ratio = (ch1 << 15) / ch0;
Channel 0 is sensitive to both infrared and visible light. In total
darkness, the sensor should return 0. Correct me if I am wrong, but
I believe that returning 0 here is more correct than -EAGAIN.
Brian
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v3 16/28] staging: iio: tsl2583: updated code comment to match what the code does Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org> - 2016-11-10 10:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 16/28] staging: iio: tsl2583: updated code comment to match what the code does Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> - 2016-11-12 17:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 16/28] staging: iio: tsl2583: updated code comment to match what the code does Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org> - 2016-11-12 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 16/28] staging: iio: tsl2583: updated code comment to match what the code does Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> - 2016-11-12 18:20 +0100
csiph-web