[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091126180646.GA9059@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:06:46 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>
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
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?
confused,
greg k-h
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists