Re: naming IIO_IN_DIFF in-in

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>]

On 06/07/11 10:00, Michael Hennerich wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>=20
> I wonder if naming IIO_IN_DIFF in-in is really a good idea.
> Declaring the attribute in a conventional fashion doesn't work.
>=20
> static IIO_DEVICE_ATTR(in-in_scale_available, S_IRUGO, \
> ad7793_show_scale_available, NULL, 0);
Yup, that's why we have IIO_DEVICE_ATTR_NAMED.

static IIO_DEVICE_ATTR_NAMED(in_m_in_scale_available, in-in_scale_avail=
able,
S_IRUGO, ad7793_show_scale_available, NULL, 0)

should give you an iio_dev_attr_in_m_in_scale_available to use in the
attribute table.  It will show up in sysfs as in-in_scale_available.

>=20
> static struct attribute *ad7793_attributes[] =3D {
> &iio_dev_attr_sampling_frequency.dev_attr.attr,
> &iio_const_attr_sampling_frequency_available.dev_attr.attr,
> &iio_dev_attr_in-in_scale_available.dev_attr.attr,
> NULL
> };
>=20
> drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7793.c:681: error: expected =91=3D=92, =91,=
=92, =91;=92, =91asm=92 or =91__attribute__=92 before =91-=92 token
> drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7793.c:688: error: =91iio_dev_attr_in=92 un=
declared here (not in a function)
> drivers/staging/iio/adc/ad7793.c:688: error: =91in_scale_available=92=
 undeclared here (not in a function)
>=20