[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101005140049.1f25bb24@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 14:00:49 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com
Cc: "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] misc: Driver for APDS990X ALS and proximity sensors
> > - not clear how power_state and runtime pm interact - do we in fact need
> > power state ?
>
> power_state turns chip on or off. In off state runtime pm is used to
> handle bookkeeping and also handling chip state transitions including
> regulators. Other ideas than separate power_state for this kind of
> control?
Ok that makes sense.
>
>
> > - lux0_input range being fixed seems inconvenient, the sensors I've got
> > queued here use lux0_input as you do but also provide a read (and
> > optionally writable) range limit in lux
> >
> > static DEVICE_ATTR(lux0_sensor_range, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> > als_sensing_range_show, als_sensing_range_store);
> >
> > and in your case you could just return 65535
> >
>
> I'll add that
Cool. I'll bash our sensor queue to fit this API
--
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