From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:33435 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964989AbcDYU76 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2016 16:59:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: tmp006: Set correct iio name To: Jonathan Cameron , Yong Li References: <1461296584-11918-1-git-send-email-sdliyong@gmail.com> <43150fbd-37ac-2d51-dd87-f41670417b96@kernel.org> From: Crestez Dan Leonard Cc: knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, k.kozlowski@samsung.com, mranostay@gmail.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <571E854A.90404@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:59:54 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <43150fbd-37ac-2d51-dd87-f41670417b96@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On 04/25/2016 10:33 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On 22/04/16 04:43, Yong Li wrote: >> When load the driver using the below command: >> echo tmp006 0x40 > /sys/bus/i2c/devices/i2c-0/new_device >> >> In sysfs, the i2c name is tmp006, however the iio name is 0-0040, >> they are inconsistent. With this patch, >> the iio name will be the same as the i2c device name >> >> Signed-off-by: Yong Li > Peter, this looks right to me, but could you take a quick look as I guess > there might be a reason you did this in an unusual way originally? > Is there a "correct" or "usual" way to set indio_dev->name? Some quick grepping shows no clear standard: $ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | wc -l 148 $ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep id | wc -l 52 $ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep dev_name | wc -l 20 $ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep -i drv | wc -l 19 $ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep -i driver | wc -l 15 It seems that many devices use dev_name(&i2c_client->dev) or otherwise some sort of "ABC123_DRIVER_NAME" constant. It's also not clear what this "name" field is for. Is it more than just a cosmetic sysfs attribute? It seems to me that names don't have to be unique so it would be wrong to use them for identification. -- Regards, Leonard