On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 17:04 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 04:38:53PM +0300, Ceclan, Dumitru wrote: > > On 28/05/2024 20:52, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 03:16:07PM +0300, Ceclan, Dumitru wrote: > > > > On 27/05/2024 20:48, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 08:02:34PM +0300, Dumitru Ceclan via B4 Relay > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > From: Dumitru Ceclan <dumitru.ceclan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > + adi,channel-type: > > > > > > + description: > > > > > > + Used to differentiate between different channel types as the > > > > > > device > > > > > > + register configurations are the same for all usage types. > > > > > > + Both pseudo-differential and single-ended channels will use > > > > > > the > > > > > > + single-ended specifier. > > > > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string > > > > > > + enum: > > > > > > + - single-ended > > > > > > + - differential > > > > > > + default: differential > > > > > > > > > > I dunno if my brain just ain't workin' right today, or if this is not > > > > > sufficiently explained, but why is this property needed? You've got > > > > > diff-channels and single-channels already, why can you not infer the > > > > > information you need from them? What should software do with this > > > > > information? > > > > > Additionally, "pseudo-differential" is not explained in this binding. > > > > > > > > In previous thread we arrived to the conclusion single-ended and > > > > pseudo-differential channels should be marked with the flag > > > > "differential=false" in the IIO channel struct. This cannot > > > > really be inferred as any input pair could be used in that > > > > manner and the only difference would be in external wiring. > > > > > > > > Single-channels cannot be used to define such a channel as > > > > two voltage inputs need to be selected. Also, we are already > > > > using single-channel to define the current channels. > > > > > > If I understand correctly, the property could be simplified to a flag > > > then, since it's only the pseudo differential mode that you cannot be > > > sure of? > > > You know when you're single-ended based on single-channel, so the > > > additional info you need is only in the pseudo-differential case. > > > > > Yes, it could just be a boolean flag. The only thing I have against > > that is the awkwardness of having both diff-channels and > > differential=false within a channel definition. > > What I was suggesting was more like "adi,pseudo-differential" (you don't > need to set the =false or w/e, flag properties work based on present/not > present). I think that would avoid the awkwardness? > Yeah, that was also my understanding of your reply... But I think you're also mentioning to have this flag together with the single-channel property? I'm a bit confused because it seems to me that single-channel only gets one input while we need to select two for pseudo-differential/single-ended. Is this correct Dumitru? FWIW, I think we already have that awkwardness in the current form. If I'm not missing anything, what we have in the driver is pretty much: if (not diff && single-channel) // then current channel else // relies on the channel-type stuff So, effectively with the above we have diff-channels = <1 0>; but then wait, not so fast adi,channel-type = "single-ended" To me the above is equally awkward (not sure if there's any precedence in using diff- channels like this though)... I would like for this to be explicit... If we have diff-channels, then it's surely differential. If not we could use the single-channel property and instead of using an extra flag we could make the property having either 1 or 2 items. If we have 1, then it's a current channel. If we have 2, then it's voltage single-ended/pseudo-differential. David's suggestion is also pretty good (and I like it's more explicit about what's going on) so I would likely go with it... - Nuno Sá > > > >
