On 26/05/09 05:31PM, David Lechner wrote: > On 5/8/26 12:00 PM, Rodrigo Alencar via B4 Relay wrote: > > This patch series adds support for the Analog Devices AD9910 DDS. > > This is a RFC so that we can agree/discuss on the design that follows: > > > > This is a follow-up of the V3 discussion. For V1, we reached into > > this channel composition agreement where physical channels may have > > sub-channels. That adds the flexibility necessary for this design. > > During V2, some feedback indicated that the ABI is too device-specific, > > so DRG/RAM destination and operating modes are configured through > > alternate paths and profile channels are created. In V3, there was > > further discussion on the ABI and on mode priority debug. > > > What happened with the idea of adding a new attribute to show the > relationship of the sub-channels to the actual physical output > channels?
That's still to be done in iio core. I was still to think on how to do that, and I am trying to get a mature ABI first. I am not sure about the use case where a sub-channel is shared between multiple channels, but I thought of a iio_chan_spec pointer to a parent iio_chan_spec in the same struct. Similar to a device-tree, we have the primary tree structure and then phandles can be used separately to create more complex dependencies between channels. So a "channel ref" attribute could be separate concept. Then iio core would create the read-only attribute "subcomponent_of" or "parent" when that is not NULL. The read function would just output the parent channel label. Then labels would be important to create this logical dependency between channels, and maybe that is bad, but in this context, I suppose labels are going to be needed anyways. -- Kind regards, Rodrigo Alencar
