On 06/04/2014 12:42 AM, Peter Meerwald wrote:
an IRQ is necessary to handle the ALERT condition; without IRQ, the IIO event interface serves no purpose Signed-off-by: Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@xxxxxxxxxx>
Makes sense. We should probably at some point investigate if it is possible to implement something to ignore certain channel attributes when the channel is created, rather than having to have two almost identical declarations of the channel arrays.
Acked-by: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> [...]
@@ -612,8 +702,9 @@ static int ad799x_probe(struct i2c_client *client, i2c_set_clientdata(client, indio_dev); st->id = id->driver_data; - st->chip_info = &ad799x_chip_info_tbl[st->id]; - st->config = st->chip_info->default_config; + st->chip_config = (client->irq > 0 && chip_info->irq_config.info) ? + &chip_info->irq_config : &chip_info->noirq_config;
Nitpick: should be if (...) st->chip_config = ...; else st->chip_config = ...;
+ st->config = st->chip_config->default_config; /* TODO: Add pdata options for filtering and bit delay */
[...] -- 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
