On Friday 18 March 2011, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > I guess if it's always in${i}-in${i+1}, it's still not too hard. > I think they have been so far, but doubt this is universal. > How about having a diff type and just having a pair of indices in the > channel structure? Actually may need a third for x^2+y^2+z^2 devices. > (iirc there are parts that do x^2+y^2 despite also having a z channel) > ... If two identifiers are common, that would probably be fine. If you have a x^2+y^2+z^2 device, it might be easier to call that a different type with a fixed name, as long as there is a small number of combinations. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html