From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: outdated documentation for lp5523 LED driver? Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:26:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20160715092657.GA25380@amd> References: <20160715073214.GC13429@amd> <20160715074052.GE29844@pali> <20160715085425.GA21257@amd> <20160715090110.GF29844@pali> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160715090110.GF29844@pali> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= Cc: sre@kernel.org, kernel list , linux-arm-kernel , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, tony@atomide.com, khilman@kernel.org, aaro.koskinen@iki.fi, ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com, patrikbachan@gmail.com, serge@hallyn.com, samu.p.onkalo@nokia.com, milo.kim@ti.com, toshik@chromium.org, j.anaszewski@samsung.com, cooloney@gmail.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Fri 2016-07-15 11:01:10, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > On Friday 15 July 2016 10:54:25 Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Fri 2016-07-15 09:40:52, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > > > On Friday 15 July 2016 09:32:14 Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > >=20 > > > > Documentation says that load/leds are only visible in the load = mode, > > > > but that does not seem to be true (kernel 4.4.0 on N900). > > > >=20 > > > > # 1) Legacy interface - enginex_mode, enginex_load and enginex_= leds > > > > # Control interface for the engines: > > > > # x is 1 .. 3 > > > > # enginex_mode : disabled, load, run > > > > # enginex_load : microcode load (visible only in load mode= ) > > > > # enginex_leds : led mux control (visible only in load mod= e) > > > >=20 > > > > pavel@n900:/sys/class/leds/lp5523:r/device$ ls -al engine* > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine1_leds > > > > --w------- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine1_load > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 23:41 engine1_mode > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine2_leds > > > > --w------- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine2_load > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 23:41 engine2_mode > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine3_leds > > > > --w------- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine3_load > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4096 Jul 6 22:47 engine3_mode > > > > pavel@n900:/sys/class/leds/lp5523:r/device$ grep . engine*mode > > > > engine1_mode:run > > > > engine2_mode:load > > > > engine3_mode:run > > > > pavel@n900:/sys/class/leds/lp5523:r/device$ > > >=20 > > > On 2.6.28 kernel is present only legacy interface and for this ve= rsion > > > is above documentation correct. When engine is in "run" or "disab= led", > > > then sysfs nodes _load and _leds are invisible. > >=20 > > Well, I don't think 2.6.28 is suitable kernel to compare > > against... and I don't think hiding sysfs attributes makes any sens= e. >=20 > It is legacy interface which was used in older kernels (like 2.6.28) = and > is there to not break existing applications... So comparing with kern= el > when that interface was not legacy is correct way to check... Well, not breaking legacy applications is only goal after reasonable interface is merged to mainline. Can you test if they actually care about the change or not? I suspect they don't. Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses= /blog.html