Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] iio: adc: ad7124: add filter support

[David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>]

On 9/11/25 11:49 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 12:43 AM David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add support to the ad7124 driver for selecting the filter type.
>>
>> The filter type has an influence on the effective sampling frequency of
>> each channel. For sinc3+pf{1,2,3,4}, the sampling frequency is fixed.
>> For sinc{3,4} (without post filter), there is a factor of 3 or 4
>> depending on the filter type. For the extra +sinc1, there is an extra
>> averaging factor that depends on the power mode.
>>
>> In order to select the closest sampling frequency for each filter type,
>> we keep a copy of the requested sampling frequency. This way, if the
>> user sets the sampling frequency first and then selects the filter type,
>> the sampling frequency will still be as close as possible to the
>> requested value.
>>
>> Since we always either have the SINGLE_CYCLE bit set or have more than
>> one channel enabled, the sampling frequency is always using the
>> "zero-latency" calculation from the data sheet. This is only documented
>> for the basic sinc{3,4} filters, so the other filter types had to be
>> inferred and confirmed through testing.
>>
>> Since the flat filter type list consists of multiple register fields,
>> the struct ad7124_channel_config::filter_type field is changed to the
>> enum ad7124_filter_type type to avoid nested switch statements in a
>> lot of places.
> 
> ...
> 
>> -       factor = 32 * 4; /* N = 4 for default sinc4 filter. */
>> -       odr_sel_bits = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(fclk, odr * factor +
>> -                                              odr_micro * factor / MICRO);
>> -       odr_sel_bits = clamp(odr_sel_bits, 1, 2047);
>> +       divisor = cfg->requested_odr * factor +
>> +                 cfg->requested_odr_micro * factor / MICRO;
>> +       odr_sel_bits = clamp(DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(fclk, divisor), 1, 2047);
> 
> I have a déjà vu feeling here. Is this similar code to elsewhere?  Can
> it be factored out to a helper?
> 
> 

It is changing the same code from a previous commit, not duplicating
it. I guess I could have introduced the divisor variable in the
earlier commit and saved some churn.