[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrZaDx2NdvaFdgOxWBuwtjMnJE41p=x5b2x2moFEO3kXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:29:30 +0100
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Harish Jenny K N <harish_kandiga@...tor.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, avri.altman@....com,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <Vladimir_Zapolskiy@...tor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] mmc: Export host capabilities to debugfs.
On 15 March 2018 at 11:26, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 11:12 +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 13 March 2018 at 06:10, Harish Jenny K N <harish_kandiga@...tor.com
>> > wrote:
>> >
>
>> Honestly, I don't like this, but maybe other people do, then I am fine
>> with this approach.
>>
>> If were to decide, I would just rather print the caps field in a
>> hexadecimal bit form and leave the translation to the user.
>
> A compromise would be to print both:
>
> 0xHHHHHHHH\n
> Description of each enabled field, one per line
>
>
> Another format would be:
>
> Bit XX: Description of a field
If we were to print the description, there is no point in printing the
bits in hex. Or is it?
As I said, if you and other folkz thinks this is valuable, then I am
fine as well. Just saying, it's not my preferred option.
Kind regards
Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists