linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] als: add unique device-ids to the als device class

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:40:04 +0000
From:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
CC:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...durent.com>,
	List Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	rui.zhang@...el.com, alan@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] als: add unique device-ids to the als device class

Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 05:19:13PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> That being said... If we want user-space to know what device is there,
>>> we may want to still let drivers pass a name string to
>>> als_device_register() and let the ALS core create a "name" sysfs
>>> attribute returning the string in question. This would be much lighter
>>> (for individual drivers) than the previous situation, as the string in
>>> question would be a constant (e.g. "TSL2550".) Opinions?
>>>
>> Makes sense given we want all drivers to support some form of identification.
>> We could do it by stating they will all have that attribute, but given it's constant
>> will save repetition to put it in the driver. Conversely it might complicate the handling
>> of subsequent attribute_groups so I'd probably favour adding relevant documentation lines
>> and leaving it up to the drivers to implement this attribute.
>>
>> Thus we'd require (within reason) all drivers to have illuminance0 and name.
> 
> Why have a name attribute when you can just use the name of the device
> itself instead?  Isn't that what it is there for?
Could do, though I'm not entirely sure all bus types are implementing a name
attribute (I may be wrong, but I don't think spi does for example though it might
have gone in with the recent device table stuff).  We could just specify that it
should be present for the device.

Jonathan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/