[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2e6019f5-94fc-bb13-f616-0c1cfe81a7db@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 08:47:47 +0300
From: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@...il.com>,
Gregor Boirie <gregor.boirie@...rot.com>,
Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Healy <Chris.Healy@....aero>,
Jeff White <Jeff.White@....aero>,
Vladimir Barinov <vladimir.barinov@...entembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] iio: hi8435: do not enable all events by default
24.05.2017 22:27, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2017 11:08:30 +0300
> Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com> wrote:
>
>> Having all events enabled by default is misleading.
>> Userspace should explicitly enable events they want to receive.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>
> I agree in principle, but this is a userspace ABI change. Sadly we
> can't do it with out risking breaking userspace code...
>
> One of those we should have caught in review, but now it's there
> we can't actually do anything about it unless we are absolutely
> sure no one will notice!
I see your point.
Still, isn't there subsystem-level default that all events are disabled
by default? If such, then current hi8435 state breaks subsystem-level
rules, which is a [userspace-visible] bug. I'm not sure how far should
we go in bug compatibility.
One crazy idea could be - make default selectable via device tree (with
default set to all-enabled to keep bug-compatibility). But perhaps
that's over-reaction.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists