[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110314224859.GA16970@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 15:48:59 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>,
mems applications <mems.applications@...com>,
"rdunlap@...otime.net" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
"carmine.iascone@...com" <carmine.iascone@...com>,
"matteo.dameno@...com" <matteo.dameno@...com>,
"rubini@...vis.unipv.it" <rubini@...l.unipv.it>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add STMicroelectronics LPS001WP pressure sensor device
driver into misc
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 21:36:43 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 14 March 2011 21:18:09 Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Jonathan is correct. Pressure sensors are not hardware monitoring
> > > devices, their drivers have nothing to do in drivers/hwmon. This is
> > > something for drivers/misc or staging/iio.
> >
> > I generally try to prevent people from adding more ad-hoc interfaces
> > to drivers/misc. Anything that is called a drivers/misc driver to me
> > must qualify as "there can't possibly be a second driver with the
> > same semantics", otherwise it should be part of another subsystem
> > with clear rules, or be put into its own file system.
>
> I see drivers/misc differently. I see it as "not enough drivers of the
> same type to justify a new subsystem". So I encourage people to put
> things there in the absence of any suitable subsystem, until someone
> gets enough motivation to start such a subsystem. This is more
> pragmatic than requesting subsystems to be created upfront.
>
Agreed.
Note that there is already a pressure sensor in drivers/misc - bmp085.c.
That chip also includes a temperature sensor.
> That being said, staging is another option nowadays.
>
> > While it seems that right now everyone is just trying to keep move
> > the driver to some other subsystem, I think it's worth noting that
> > it is indeed a useful thing to have the driver, I'm optimistic
> > that we can find some place for it. ;-)
> >
> > Now how about the IIO stuff? This is the first time I've even
> > heard about it. Does it have any major disadvantages besides
> > being staging-quality?
>
> This is indeed the major disadvantage. IIO seems to take a lot of time
> to move out of staging, although I don't know what the current ETA is.
>
In general it would be nice to have a "sensors" subsystem. iio is going into
that direction, so creating another one might not make much sense at this point.
Guenter
--
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