[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1286282384.21781.62.camel@4fid08082>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 15:39:44 +0300
From: Onkalo Samu <samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com>
To: ext Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
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
On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 15:00 +0200, ext Alan Cox wrote:
> > > - 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
There are quite many naming convetion changes proposed
by Jonathan Cameron. I think that those are valid.
-Samu
--
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