On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 09:44:02AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 5/14/19 9:37 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:46:35AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> If the SCMI firmware implementation is reporting values in a scale that > >> is different from the HWMON units, we need to scale up or down the value > >> according to how far appart they are. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c b/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c > >> index a80183a488c5..2c7b87edf5aa 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c > >> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c > >> @@ -18,6 +18,47 @@ struct scmi_sensors { > >> const struct scmi_sensor_info **info[hwmon_max]; > >> }; > >> > >> +static inline u64 __pow10(u8 x) > >> +{ > >> + u64 r = 1; > >> + > >> + while (x--) > >> + r *= 10; > >> + > >> + return r; > >> +} > >> + > >> +static int scmi_hwmon_scale(const struct scmi_sensor_info *sensor, u64 > >> *value) > >> +{ > >> + s8 scale = sensor->scale; > >> + u64 f; > >> + > >> + switch (sensor->type) { > >> + case TEMPERATURE_C: > >> + case VOLTAGE: > >> + case CURRENT: > >> + scale += 3; > >> + break; > >> + case POWER: > >> + case ENERGY: > >> + scale += 6; > >> + break; > >> + default: > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + > > > > I was applying this and wanted to check if we can add a check for scale=0 > > here and return early here to above the below check and __pow10(0) ? > > Doing an early check for scale == 0 sounds like a good idea,good catch! > Feel free to amend the patch directly when you apply it. >
Ok with me. Just make it == 0 :-). Guenter > > > > Let me know if you agree. I can fix up. Also I will try to test it on > > Juno if firmware behaves correctly :) > > Great, thanks. > -- > Florian
