[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313211410.GB32331@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 14:14:10 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
Robert Shearman <robertshearman@...il.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Robert Shearman <robert.shearman@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] i2c: mux: pca954x: allow management of device
idle state via sysfs
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 05:36:10PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> > > I was wondering if you think the below ABI addition looks sane to you?
> > I am not the i2c maintainer :)
>
> Peter is the i2c-mux maintainer, so I trust him very much on the I2C
> side of things. We just wondered if you'd notice a general flaw when
> exposing such an interface to userspace.
Ah, I see. No, looks fine to me, it's a single value, well documented,
should be just fine.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists