public inbox for linux-leds@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com>
To: Marek Behun <marek.behun@nic.cz>
Cc: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: HW LED triggers again
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 20:26:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <af881e33-8de3-69ad-0214-3ea313ac1db7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200320204308.411f8d68@nic.cz>

Hi Marek,

On 3/20/20 8:43 PM, Marek Behun wrote:
> Hi Jacek,
> 
> I want to open the discussions about HW LED triggers again.
> The last time (which was almost a year ago, sorry for that) I proposed
> an API which used the same sysfs trigger file as for regular trigger
> setting, but the HW triggers were prefixed with "hw:" (and each LED
> classdev can have different ones).
> 
> You wrote:
> 
>> I wonder what will be the gain of having hw triggers incorporated
>> into LED trigger mechanism, if they are meant not be generic
>> by design? Only the LED class driver exposing a hw trigger
>> will know how to set it up, and will define protocol via which
>> the settings will be passed from sysfs to the trigger (const char*
>> parameter in the hw_trigger_set() op).
>>
>> And it has to be that way because hardware triggers are hardware
>> specific. LED class driver will have to create trigger specific
>> sysfs files regardless of whether they are to be shown on
>> trigger avtivation, or will persist for the whole LED class device
>> lifetime.
>>
>> Maybe I'm missing some vital details from the previous discussions,
>> but this is what's come to my mind now, after analyzing the proposed
>> design.
>>
>> The question is: what problem we solve by exposing non-generic
>> hw trigger, whose implementation will be in the driver anyway,
>> instead of just bypassing the trigger mechanism and exposing
>> the required interface directly?
> 
> I would still like to go this way, so my answer to this questions is:
> - IMO this is simpler for users and existing scripts
> - the idea is that it should no be possible to set a software trigger
>   and a hardware trigger at the same time (this would just end up in
>   more complications), and introducing special hw_trigger file or
>   something could make users think that you can

OK, that seems like a decent justification. If you had provided it at
that time then maybe we would have had generic hw trigger mechanism
merged a year ago :-).

-- 
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski

      parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-21 19:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-20 19:43 HW LED triggers again Marek Behun
2020-03-21 10:23 ` Pavel Machek
2020-03-21 19:26 ` Jacek Anaszewski [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=af881e33-8de3-69ad-0214-3ea313ac1db7@gmail.com \
    --to=jacek.anaszewski@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-leds@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marek.behun@nic.cz \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox