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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:10:34 +0530 From: "Hemanth V" <hemanthv@...com> To: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> Cc: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@....ac.uk>, "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, "Manuel Stahl" <manuel.stahl@....fraunhofer.de>, "Jean Delvare" <khali@...ux-fr.org>, "Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>, "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <drivers@...log.com>, <achew@...dia.com>, "Donggeun Kim" <dg77.kim@...sung.com> Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:02 PM Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:34:36PM +0530, Hemanth V wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hemanth V" <hemanthv@...com> >> To: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@....ac.uk>; "Dmitry Torokhov" >> <dtor@...l.ru> >> >> >> >----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Cameron" >> ><jic23@....ac.uk> >> >To: "Jonathan Cameron" <jic23@....ac.uk> >> >Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:36 PM >> >Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. >> > >> > >> >>Given the lack of further comment, I went ahead and implemented >> >>the above naming >> >>scheme for IIO. As the above discussion with Hemanth shows, >> >>there are some corner cases >> >>that will need futher thought in the future. >> >> >> > >> >Jonathan, haven't seen many comments on this. Do u think the reason >> >might be that these interfaces are hidden behind a HAL layer like >> >in android and >> >might not be a burning issue for many people. >> > >> >> Dmitry, could you let us know your thoughts on this too. >> Would using a HAL layer be better compared to creating a standard >> sysfs interface, as it seems to be the popular approach. >> > > Hemanth, > > I do not really see the difference between sysfs interface and HAL > interface. They both abstract hardware details and bring them to common > denominator. If you guys can agree on HAL interface I trust sysfs should > be possible too ;) > > BTW, the reason I do not comment on sysfs accelerometer infrastructure > is because it is not topic I am vested in, my time budget barely covers > pure input matters. So as long as there is something that is common and > shared between drivers I would be good with it; you guys need to decide > on details, please. > Dmitry, thanks for the clarification, just wanted to make sure everyone is on the same page. As you had suggested, I will push the cma3000 driver without the sysfs interface. I will parallely work with Jonathan to come up with a standard sysfs interface. Thanks Hemanth -- 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