From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] platform/x86/intel_pmc_core: Convert to DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:33:50 +0300 Message-ID: <1467207230.30123.329.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <1465840609-136143-1-git-send-email-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20160628090504.GA2169@rajaneesh-OptiPlex-9010> <1467108307.30123.303.camel@linux.intel.com> <20160629080325.GA11318@rajaneesh-OptiPlex-9010> <1467200985.30123.320.camel@linux.intel.com> <20160629121604.GA26750@rajaneesh-OptiPlex-9010> <1467204505.30123.326.camel@linux.intel.com> <20160629132038.GB26750@rajaneesh-OptiPlex-9010> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:39302 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752524AbcF2NeT (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:34:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160629132038.GB26750@rajaneesh-OptiPlex-9010> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Rajneesh Bhardwaj Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart , Vishwanath Somayaji On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 18:50 +0530, Rajneesh Bhardwaj wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 03:48:25PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 17:46 +0530, Rajneesh Bhardwaj wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 02:49:45PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 13:33 +0530, Rajneesh Bhardwaj wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 01:05:07PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko > > > > > wrote: > >=20 > > > > >=20 > > If it touches the same attribute it needs to be seen first before > > applying this one. > >=20 >=20 > No, this attribute wont be touched. So, if there is no objections (taking into consideration minors you mentioned) I think the patch can be applied. > Can we have seq_printf for such cases and use > > > DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE > > > for > > > other simple attributes? Doing this might raise some coding style > > > consistency=C2=A0 > > > concerns though so lets wait to hear=C2=A0=C2=A0Darren's opinion = on this > > > patch. > >=20 > > For the rest we have to see the implementation and decide how to > > proceed > > (since it's a debugfs dedicated for _debugging_) we might change it > > in > > the way we like. Though I don't encourage people to do this. I like > > interfaces on which people thought before implementing. > >=20 >=20 > Sure, i am fine with DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE but would like to leave > the scope > for having seq_printf for future patches i.e. linux/seq_file.h and > thus would > have a dependency on struct file_operations for seq_read. Of course! No-one is insisting to use only the macro and simple attributes. --=20 Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy