linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] input: CMA3000 Accelerometer driver

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:	Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:27:12 +0100
From:	Jonathan Cameron <kernel@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>
To:	Hemanth V <hemanthv@...com>
CC:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] input: CMA3000 Accelerometer driver

On 09/21/10 06:46, Hemanth V wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Cameron" <kernel@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>
> To: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
> Cc: "Hemanth V" <hemanthv@...com>; <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>; <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 6:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] input: CMA3000 Accelerometer driver
> 
> 
>> On 09/14/10 09:00, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 12:37:40PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy to see your driver go in as it is currently, what bothers me is that we will end
>>>> up with incompatible interfaces for all the accelerometers Dmitry takes!
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is a valid concern. How about I chicken out and will not merge any
>>> new sysfs knobs until you guys decide on reasonable interface? Most set
>>> up is done by board code anyways, sysfs is more of nice-to-have?
>> Hemanth, would removing the sysfs hooks from this driver be ok with you?
>> I'd personally have favoured a merge, add new interfaces when agreed and
>> deprecate old ones approach, but it is Dmitry's call.  Perhaps it is better
>> to get the majority of the device functionality in place now and add
>> the bells and whistles later.
>>
>> For input device things are probably mostly fixed for a particular board
>> design.  There are definitely interesting things one can do if the knobs
>> are available but they (I think) mostly fall outside of using the device
>> for input!
>>
> 
> Dmitry, Jonathan
> 
> I am ok to remove the sysfs entries for now, but would cause some limitations
> like not being able to change sampling frequency / disabling interrupts runtime.
> 
> Wanted to clarify if the intention is to come up with a standard sysfs interface
> for all accelerometer drivers under input/misc including adxl34x.
The intent is to come up with an interface covering a much wider range of devices
if at all possible. I've proposed options for conventional threshold and rate of
change interrupts on IIO (you were cc'd IIRC). I'll propose those on to lkml shortly
and suggest that others suggest the interfaces they would like to see added (or
object to the syntax for the ones I've covered!)

To be honest, sampling frequency is much more general and I would imagine applies to
lots of input drivers.  Do you already have a standard for this Dmitry?

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/