Re: [Patch V2] drivers: power: Add support for bq24735 charger

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1310 bytes --]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 02:13:02PM -0400, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> On 9/20/2013 3:53 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >>>> +     name = charger_device->pdata->name;
> >>>> +     if (!name) {
> >>>> +             name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "bq24735-%s",
> >>>> +                              dev_name(&client->dev));
> >>>
> >>> Won't the device name already include bq24735 because of the driver
> >>> name?
> >>
> >> In my experience this comes up with a name like "bq24735-5-0009". Thats
> >> why I added the bq24735 in the beginning, so the name is more descriptive.
> > 
> > Yes, you're right. Perhaps in that case it's even easier to just stick
> > with a static string such as "bq24735" or "bq24735-charger". It's likely
> > to be the only device of that type in a machine. If you want to include
> > the device name, perhaps something like "%s/bq24735" (5-0009/bq24735) is
> > clearer that 5-0009 is actually the bus-specific name.
> > 
> 
> So it turns out if I try to put in a '/' or '\' they are translated to
> '!' in sysfs, so the name comes out to be '5-0009!bq24735'. Perhaps
> 'bq24735@5-0009' to still signify that the 5-009 is more of an address
> than chip name? What do you think Thierry?

I hadn't thought about that. @ looks like a better separator indeed.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]