Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iio: chemical: bme680: Add device-tree support

[sebastien bourdelin]

Hi,

On 1/12/19 4:42 AM, Himanshu Jha wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 03:53:58PM -0500, Sebastien Bourdelin wrote:
> > This commit allow the driver to work with device-tree.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastien Bourdelin <sebastien.bourdelin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> I get the following compilation failure:
>
> Below I have `allyesconfig` except 'BME680' configure as [M]
> in case you wish to reproduce.
>
> himanshu@himanshu-Vostro-3559:~/linux-next$ grep -i -w 'CONFIG_BME680\|CONFIG_ACPI\|CONFIG_OF' .config
> CONFIG_ACPI=y
> CONFIG_OF=y
> CONFIG_BME680=m
> himanshu@himanshu-Vostro-3559:~/linux-next$ sudo make drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o
> make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
>    CALL    scripts/checksyscalls.sh
>    DESCEND  objtool
>    CC [M]  drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o
> In file included from ./include/linux/acpi.h:41:0,
>                   from drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.c:7:
> ./include/linux/module.h:213:1: error: expected â,â or â;â before âexternâ
>   extern typeof(name) __mod_##type##__##name##_device_table  \
>   ^
> drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.c:119:1: note: in expansion of macro âMODULE_DEVICE_TABLEâ
>   MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bme680_of_spi_match);
>   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> scripts/Makefile.build:291: recipe for target 'drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o' failed
> make[1]: *** [drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o] Error 1
> Makefile:1741: recipe for target 'drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o' failed
> make: *** [drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o] Error 2
Thanks for the test, this is bad, i will fix that!
> BUT if:
>
> himanshu@himanshu-Vostro-3559:~/linux-next$ make allyesconfig
> scripts/kconfig/conf  --allyesconfig Kconfig
> #
> # configuration written to .config
> #
>
> himanshu@himanshu-Vostro-3559:~/linux-next$ sudo make drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o
> scripts/kconfig/conf  --syncconfig Kconfig
> make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/flattree.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/fstree.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/data.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/livetree.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/treesource.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/srcpos.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/checks.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/util.o
>    LEX     scripts/dtc/dtc-lexer.lex.c
>    YACC    scripts/dtc/dtc-parser.tab.h
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-lexer.lex.o
>    YACC    scripts/dtc/dtc-parser.tab.c
>    HOSTCC  scripts/dtc/dtc-parser.tab.o
>    HOSTLD  scripts/dtc/dtc
>    CC      scripts/mod/empty.o
>    MKELF   scripts/mod/elfconfig.h
>    HOSTCC  scripts/mod/modpost.o
>    CC      scripts/mod/devicetable-offsets.s
>    HOSTCC  scripts/mod/file2alias.o
>    HOSTCC  scripts/mod/sumversion.o
>    HOSTLD  scripts/mod/modpost
>    CC      kernel/bounds.s
>    CC      arch/x86/kernel/asm-offsets.s
>    CALL    scripts/checksyscalls.sh
>    DESCEND  objtool
>    CC      drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_spi.o
>
> Compiles without any issues.
Hum, weird it compiles actually :s
> Also, wondering when is 0x77 i2c address used, since I tested
> this on 3 different boards with 0x76(when SDO is connected to GND)
>
> And why do I connect SDO to ground everytime ?
> It is because if SDO pin is left floating then I2C address will be
> undefined as said in datasheet + I have observed this while testing.

Ah, thanks for the reminder, actually i have only tested with a floating

SDO, but i will probably use the GND instead even if i didn't had any

problem right now.

> Actallly, I don't understand what "VDIDO" is, as explained in the
> datasheet.
>
>
> Anyway, if the above compilation issue is not a problem, then
>
> 	Acked-by: Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Thanks