drivers: sensor: microchip: mtch9010 Added MTCH9010 Device Support #91812

robertperkel · 2025-06-18T07:59:14Z

Added new driver for MTCH9010 liquid leak detector along with test patterns.

robertperkel · 2025-06-18T08:00:22Z

If possible, could we add this for v4.2

kartben · 2025-06-18T08:59:45Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+#define MTCH9010_OPERATING_MODE_INIT(inst)                                                         \
+	COND_CODE_1(DT_INST_ENUM_HAS_VALUE(inst, mtch9010_operating_mode,\
+		capacitive), (MTCH9010_CONDUCTIVE), (MTCH9010_CAPACITIVE))


unless i'm mistaken:

Suggested change

#define MTCH9010_OPERATING_MODE_INIT(inst) \

COND_CODE_1(DT_INST_ENUM_HAS_VALUE(inst, mtch9010_operating_mode,\

capacitive), (MTCH9010_CONDUCTIVE), (MTCH9010_CAPACITIVE))

#define MTCH9010_OPERATING_MODE_INIT(inst) \

COND_CODE_1(DT_INST_ENUM_HAS_VALUE(inst, mtch9010_operating_mode,\

capacitive), (MTCH9010_CAPACITIVE), (MTCH9010_CONDUCTIVE))

I seem to remember a test error before I swapped it ... I'll look at it again

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:00:32Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+			gpio_pin_set_dt(&config->enableUARTLine, GPIO_OUTPUT_LOW);
+		} else {
+			gpio_pin_set_dt(&config->enableUARTLine, GPIO_OUTPUT_HIGH);


copy-paste error from previous block

Ah, I see. UART EN is active LOW. Clarified intention in comments

no the issue is basically the same thing @msalau commented on. You want to be controlling enableCFGLine here, not enableUARTLine??

Thanks - I think I see the issue now

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:03:26Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+{
+	/* Note: nRESET is handled in device reset function */
+	int rtn = 0;
+


you're missing gpio_pin_configure_dt steps for the enableUARTLine and enableCFGLine output pins

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:04:20Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+{
+	int ret = 0;
+	const struct mtch9010_config_t *config = dev->config;
+	struct mtch9010_data_t *devData = dev->data;


no camel case please -- apply everywhere in the PR
https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/contribute/style/code.html#:~:text=Use%20snake%20case%20for%20code%20and%20variables.

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:06:07Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+		val->val1 = data->heartbeatErrorState;
+		break;
+	}
+	default: {


you're missing SENSOR_CHAN_MTCH9010_MEAS_RESULT_AND_DELTA case?

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:07:23Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+		.reference = MTCH9010_REF_VAL_INIT(inst),                                          \
+		.threshold = DT_INST_PROP(inst, mtch9010_detect_value),                            \
+		.heartbeatErrorState = false,                                                      \
+		.lastResult = {0, 0}};                                                             \


lastWake also needs to be initialized to zero to not have issues w/ first sample reading

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/Kconfig

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:15:05Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+		mtch9010_command_send(uartDev, config, tBuffer);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_MTCH9010_LOCK_ON_STARTUP
+		mtch9010_lock_device(dev);


undeclared function? did you mean mtch9010_lock_settings?

kartben · 2025-06-18T09:18:50Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+		/* Keep LOW until ready to configure */
+		gpio_pin_configure_dt(&config->lockLine, GPIO_OUTPUT | GPIO_OUTPUT_INIT_HIGH);


comment doesn't match the code

Comment is incorrect - fixed

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/test_configs/data_format/current.overlay

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/boards/native_sim.overlay

drivers/sensor/microchip/CMakeLists.txt

robertperkel · 2025-06-19T04:16:12Z

@kartben I'm looking at the twister failures, and it doesn't seem related to my PR, as I don't utilize with the file system. Can you confirm or rerun/ignore that twister error?

kartben · 2025-06-19T07:46:39Z

@kartben I'm looking at the twister failures, and it doesn't seem related to my PR, as I don't utilize with the file system. Can you confirm or rerun/ignore that twister error?

yep, had nothing to do with you, and fixed now :)

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/Kconfig

msalau · 2025-06-19T08:43:06Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+	data->last_heartbeat = k_uptime_get();
+
+	/* Wait for boot-up */
+	k_msleep(CONFIG_MTCH9010_BOOT_TIME_MS);


Just highlighting that this will delay boot up process for all.

Unfortunately, things stop working when I remove this delay. I have some theories, but for now, I'd like to keep this.

msalau · 2025-06-19T08:48:08Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+		LOG_INST_DBG(config->log, "UART setup not enabled");
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_MTCH9010_LOCK_ON_STARTUP
+		BUILD_ASSERT(true, "MTCH9010_LOCK_ON_STARTUP cannot be set without UART enabled");


Location of this BUILD_ASSERT() is somewhat strange to me. It is not a part of the initialization routine. I think it should be closer to MTCH9010_DEFINE() and be checked at build time.

Moved assertion to define section 👍

Please do not resolve comments. This is for the reviewers to do

https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/contribute/contributor_expectations.html#workflow-suggestions-that-help-reviewers

My bad - thanks for letting me know

The BUILD_ASSERT keeps causing issues, and since this is an optional feature anyway, I've removed the BUILD_ASSERT.

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

robertperkel · 2025-06-19T20:02:12Z

Looks like everything is good to go on our side 👍 Local test bench is functioning as expected

robertperkel · 2025-06-23T02:31:03Z

Hi @msalau @kartben ,
Since the feature freeze date for v4.2 is this Friday, could you let me know any remaining changes and/or approve the PR?

Additionally - do I need to notify anyone of this for v4.2, or is it automatic?

Thanks for your feedback!
Robert

kartben · 2025-06-23T08:00:22Z

Hi @msalau @kartben , Since the feature freeze date for v4.2 is this Friday, could you let me know any remaining changes and/or approve the PR?

Additionally - do I need to notify anyone of this for v4.2, or is it automatic?

Thanks for your feedback! Robert

I am marking it as tentative for 4.2 but my guess is that it will be tight as it is quite a significant PR and it will take time for reviewers to go through it. Thanks!

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T04:13:14Z

Fixed double interrupt setup
Missing mode configure
Found missing case in decode, patched with error code if triggered.

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T05:21:29Z

Removed BUILD_ASSERT due to persistent issues with logic. (System Lock does not affect core functionality - is optional)

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T07:14:10Z

Fixed missing binding in yaml file

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T09:53:02Z

Just for clarification - the single SonarQube issue (init complexity > 25) is not a blocker, correct? I can try to rework init down to <25, but I think it would be pretty tricky.

msalau · 2025-06-24T13:49:06Z

@robertperkel

Is UART mandatory for this driver?

If mandatory: UART check should not be optional during initialization. Also asserting the UART configuration at build time may be a good idea. I.e. checking that speed is 38400, parity is None and 8 bits mode.

If optional: A separate binding is needed to not require an UART bus.

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T14:02:22Z

@robertperkel

Is UART mandatory for this driver?

If mandatory: UART check should not be optional during initialization. Also asserting the UART configuration at build time may be a good idea. I.e. checking that speed is 38400, parity is None and 8 bits mode.

If optional: A separate binding is needed to not require an UART bus.

Technically the answer is no, but I think practically speaking, it would be unusual for someone to use this driver and not have a UART bus. Do you think I should require the UART bus for now? If you're not using the UART, it's very easy to emulate using basic drivers.

Edit: Decided to make it required for this driver.

robertperkel · 2025-06-24T16:53:07Z

Added __ASSERT Validation of UART Parameters to Init function
Made UART Mandatory

sonarqubecloud · 2025-06-24T18:09:50Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

robertperkel · 2025-06-30T16:10:26Z

@kartben @msalau
Any other changes to make to this PR?

robertperkel · 2025-06-30T16:12:41Z

Also, should this be retagged to v4.3.0 milestone, or is v4.2.0 still open?

kartben · 2025-06-30T17:06:06Z

Also, should this be retagged to v4.3.0 milestone, or is v4.2.0 still open?

Yes, unfortunately this missed the deadline for the 4.2 release as feature freeze was last Friday. Getting a brand new 2000-line PR reviewed in just 10 short days right as everyone was wrapping up their own contributions was probably a bit ambitious unfortunately. Hope you understand!

robertperkel · 2025-07-14T04:41:25Z

Just to check - until v4.2 is released (7/18), merging is blocked, correct?

kartben · 2025-07-14T08:00:02Z

Just to check - until v4.2 is released (7/18), merging is blocked, correct?

Correct. Everything goes into main branch so until vN is released, vN+1 features are queuing up :)

comments have been addressed

robertperkel · 2025-07-21T23:25:25Z

Since 4.2 has released, can the reviewers take a look at this when they get a moment?

We're planning a follow-up to this merge with another commit containing a device sample *(in the near future)

MaureenHelm · 2025-07-25T20:18:24Z

drivers/sensor/microchip/mtch9010/mtch9010.c

+}
+
+/* Sensor APIs */
+static const struct sensor_driver_api mtch9010_api_funcs = {


Use DEVICE_API

MaureenHelm · 2025-07-25T20:21:17Z

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/test_configs/data_format/both.overlay

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+&uart1 {


overlay files are missing license/copyright headers

MaureenHelm · 2025-07-25T20:21:34Z

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/test_configs/data_format/both.overlay

+		status = "okay";
+		compatible = "microchip,mtch9010";
+
+		// Device Configuration


no c99 comments please

Added support for MTCH9010 and applied edits from reviewers. Signed-off-by: Robert Perkel <[email protected]>

sonarqubecloud · 2025-07-27T00:18:29Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

github-actions bot added the area: Sensors Sensors label Jun 18, 2025

github-actions bot requested review from asemjonovs, avisconti, jeppenodgaard, MaureenHelm, teburd, tristan-google, ubieda and yperess June 18, 2025 08:00

github-actions bot assigned MaureenHelm Jun 18, 2025

kartben requested changes Jun 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

msalau reviewed Jun 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/test_configs/data_format/current.overlay Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/drivers/sensor/mtch9010/boards/native_sim.overlay Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

drivers/sensor/microchip/CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch 3 times, most recently from cf24bb0 to e4ac4a3 Compare June 19, 2025 04:08

robertperkel requested a review from kartben June 19, 2025 04:15

robertperkel requested a review from msalau June 19, 2025 04:16

msalau reviewed Jun 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch 3 times, most recently from 511c14e to 3b46797 Compare June 19, 2025 19:17

robertperkel requested a review from msalau June 19, 2025 19:50

kartben added this to the v4.2.0 milestone Jun 23, 2025

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from ba2ea80 to 8c97c6d Compare June 24, 2025 04:40

robertperkel requested a review from msalau June 24, 2025 05:36

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from 8c97c6d to 2eeef0d Compare June 24, 2025 07:13

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from 2eeef0d to 209abb7 Compare June 24, 2025 16:52

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from 209abb7 to adbeaf3 Compare June 24, 2025 17:49

robertperkel requested a review from kartben June 26, 2025 17:42

kartben modified the milestones: v4.2.0, v4.3.0 Jun 30, 2025

MaureenHelm requested changes Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from adbeaf3 to 15420a7 Compare July 26, 2025 19:22

robertperkel requested a review from MaureenHelm July 26, 2025 19:22

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from 15420a7 to 0906ad8 Compare July 26, 2025 19:49

drivers: sensor: microchip: mtch9010 Added mtch9010 support

6b8e278

Added support for MTCH9010 and applied edits from reviewers. Signed-off-by: Robert Perkel <[email protected]>

robertperkel force-pushed the add_mtch9010_rel_v1 branch from 0906ad8 to 6b8e278 Compare July 26, 2025 23:52

		/* Keep LOW until ready to configure */
		gpio_pin_configure_dt(&config->lockLine, GPIO_OUTPUT \| GPIO_OUTPUT_INIT_HIGH);

drivers: sensor: microchip: mtch9010 Added MTCH9010 Device Support #91812

Are you sure you want to change the base?

drivers: sensor: microchip: mtch9010 Added MTCH9010 Device Support #91812

Uh oh!

Conversation

robertperkel commented Jun 18, 2025

Uh oh!

robertperkel commented Jun 18, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

robertperkel Jun 18, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

robertperkel commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

kartben commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

robertperkel commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

robertperkel commented Jun 23, 2025

robertperkel Jun 18, 2025 •

edited

Loading

robertperkel commented Jun 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

robertperkel commented Jul 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading