From: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
To: Tomas Melin <tomas.melin@vaisala.com>,
Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@analog.com>,
Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>,
Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com>
Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] iio: industrialio-backend: support backend capabilities
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 14:30:41 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <688cbfb1-0944-492a-929d-91ebb9ab22fb@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260130-b4-ad9467-optional-backend-v5-1-7da803ba7326@vaisala.com>
On 1/30/26 3:16 AM, Tomas Melin wrote:
> Not all backends support the full set of capabilities provided by the
> industrialio-backend framework. Capability bits can be used in frontends
> and backends for checking for a certain feature set, or if using
> related functions can be expected to fail.
>
> Capability bits should be set by a compatible backend and provided when
> registering the backend.
>
...
> +/**
> + * enum iio_backend_capabilities - Backend capabilities
> + * Backend capabilities can be used by frontends to check if a given
> + * functionality is supported by the backend. This is useful for frontend
> + * devices which are expected to work with alternative backend
> + * implementations. Capabilities are loosely coupled with operations,
> + * meaning that a capability requires certain operations to be implemented
> + * by the backend. A capability might be mapped to a single operation or
> + * multiple operations.
It would be helpful to list these operations explicitly for each
enum member.
> + *
> + * @IIO_BACKEND_CAP_CALIBRATION: Backend supports digital interface
> + * calibration. Calibration procedure is device specific.
> + * @IIO_BACKEND_CAP_BUFFERING: Backend supports buffering.
I assume this means it supports devm_iio_backend_request_buffer()?
In IIO, we usually say "buffer" and rarely "buffering" so this name and
description is a bit confusing to me.
> + * @IIO_BACKEND_CAP_ALWAYS_ON: Backend does not need to be explicitly
> + * enabled/disabled. It is always on.
Do we actually need this one? Alternative could be, for example:
int iio_backend_enable(struct iio_backend *back)
{
int ret;
ret = iio_backend_op_call(back, enable);
return ret == -EOPNOTSUPP ? 0 : ret;
}
Or make a iio_backend_optional_op_call() macro.
Or if there is some other nuance where this capability makes a
difference, it should be explained in more detail.
> + */
> +enum iio_backend_capabilities {
Documenting members like this works too (saves a bit of cross-referencing).
/** @IIO_BACKEND_CAP_CALIBRATION: ... */
> + IIO_BACKEND_CAP_CALIBRATION = BIT(0),
> + IIO_BACKEND_CAP_BUFFERING = BIT(1),
> + IIO_BACKEND_CAP_ALWAYS_ON = BIT(2),
> +};
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-31 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-30 9:16 [PATCH v5 0/4] iio: adc: ad9467: Support alternative backends Tomas Melin
2026-01-30 9:16 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] iio: industrialio-backend: support backend capabilities Tomas Melin
2026-01-31 20:30 ` David Lechner [this message]
2026-02-02 10:28 ` Nuno Sá
2026-02-02 11:08 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 12:40 ` Nuno Sá
2026-02-02 13:04 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 15:50 ` David Lechner
2026-02-03 9:50 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-04 1:07 ` David Lechner
2026-02-04 11:15 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-03 10:01 ` Nuno Sá
2026-02-03 10:45 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 10:58 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 15:17 ` David Lechner
2026-01-30 9:17 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] iio: adc: adi-axi-adc: define supported iio-backend capabilities Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 10:33 ` Nuno Sá
2026-01-30 9:17 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] iio: dac: adi-axi-dac: " Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 10:33 ` Nuno Sá
2026-01-30 9:17 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] iio: adc: ad9467: check for backend capabilities Tomas Melin
2026-01-31 20:40 ` David Lechner
2026-02-02 11:18 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-02 10:42 ` Nuno Sá
2026-02-02 12:03 ` Tomas Melin
2026-02-03 9:51 ` Nuno Sá
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=688cbfb1-0944-492a-929d-91ebb9ab22fb@baylibre.com \
--to=dlechner@baylibre.com \
--cc=Michael.Hennerich@analog.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nuno.sa@analog.com \
--cc=olivier.moysan@foss.st.com \
--cc=tomas.melin@vaisala.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®