[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170913185805.GB26390@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 11:58:05 -0700
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Himanshi Jain <himshijain.hj@...il.com>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, daniel.baluta@...il.com,
lars@...afoo.de, Michael.Hennerich@...log.com,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
nick.desaulniers@...il.com, outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com,
pmeerw@...erw.net, knaack.h@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] include: linux: sysfs: Add __ATTR_NAMED macro
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 06:03:10PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:14:07 +0530
> Himanshi Jain <himshijain.hj@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > Add __ATTR_NAMED macro similar to __ATTR but taking name as a
> > string instead of implicit conversion of argument to string using
> > the macro _stringify(_name).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Himanshi Jain <himshijain.hj@...il.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/sysfs.h | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/sysfs.h b/include/linux/sysfs.h
> > index aa02c32..20321cf 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/sysfs.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sysfs.h
> > @@ -104,6 +104,13 @@ struct attribute_group {
> > .store = _store, \
> > }
> >
> > +#define __ATTR_NAMED(_name, _mode, _show, _store) { \
>
> I'm not sure about the naming here. The normal __ATTR macro is also
> 'named'. Maybe something as awful as
>
> __ATTR_STRING_NAME ?
>
> Greg what do you think?
ick ick ick.
> This is all to allow us to have names with operators in them without
> checkpatch complaining about them... A worthwhile aim just to stop
> more people wasting time trying to 'fix' those cases by adding spaces.
Yeah, but this really seems "heavy" for just a crazy sysfs name in a
macro. Adding a whole new "core" define for that is a hard sell...
I also want to get rid of the "generic" __ATTR type macros, and force
people to use the proper _RW and friends instead. I don't want to add
another new one that people will start to use that I later have to
change...
So no, I don't like this, how about just changing your macros instead?
No one else has this problem :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists