linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: bq27xxx_battery: add configurable poll

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]

Message-ID: <CAKzfze9Ego1RyG8oH9S3DGGT8tC7Z6R1Mt_hkbKDBp4y39VoWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2016 20:22:16 -0700
From:   Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>
To:     Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Andrew F . Davis" <afd@...com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matt Ranostay <matt@...ostay.consulting>,
        Liam Breck <liam@...workimprov.net>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: bq27xxx_battery: add configurable
 poll_interval by sysfs

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 08:42:54PM -0700, Matt Ranostay wrote:
>> Allow the poll_interval to be runtime configurable via an sysfs
>> entry.  This is needed for udev control of the poll interval.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matt Ranostay <matt@...ostay.consulting>
>> ---
>>  drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> New sysfs attributes should be documented in Documentation/ABI.

Yeah I should know better :)

>
> Also I'm not too keen to add this, as there is already the sysfs
> entry for the module parameter. I don't see any reason why udev
> should not be able to change that value, so fix udev instead of
> duplicating functionality in the kernel.

Yeah duplication is bad.  We are wondering if having a
POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_UPDATE_INTERVAL would be an more acceptable
solution. Of course this would need to be made generic and not a per
driver solution as it is now.

Thanks,

Matt

>
> -- Sebastian