From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
Sagar Dharia <sdharia@codeaurora.org>,
Gilad Avidov <gavidov@codeaurora.org>,
Michael Bohan <mbohan@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] spmi: Linux driver framework for SPMI
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 12:58:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130816195849.GA17974@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:47:15PM -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> >
> > Why? If debugfs isn't enabled, the functions should just compile away
> > with the debugfs_() calls, so no need to do this type of thing here,
> > right?
>
> Not sure I follow you, but it may be because this is a bit misleading.
>
> Currently CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is being extended to also mean "do you want
> the SPMI core to create device entries?". It would probably make more
> sense to have a CONFIG_SPMI_DEBUG option which is def_bool DEBUG_FS, as
> other busses have.
>
> The #ifdef here would then be #ifdef CONFIG_SPMI_DEBUG, as well as in
> the Makefile:
>
> spmi-core-$(CONFIG_SPMI_DEBUG) += spmi-dbgfs.o
If debugfs is enabled why wouldn't you want debugfs entries for your
devices? Don't assume a user is going to be able to rebuild their
kernel just for debugging stuff (hint, they usually aren't), so having
these present, if they don't cause any performance issues, is usually
best to always have around.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-17 0:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-15 19:50 [PATCH RFC 0/3] Add support for the System Power Management Interface (SPMI) Josh Cartwright
2013-08-09 20:37 ` [PATCH RFC 2/3] spmi: Add MSM PMIC Arbiter SPMI controller Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 18:52 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-09 20:37 ` [PATCH RFC 1/3] spmi: Linux driver framework for SPMI Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 18:46 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-16 19:47 ` Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 19:50 ` Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 19:58 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2013-08-16 20:40 ` Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 20:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-16 18:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-16 20:21 ` Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 20:28 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-16 19:04 ` Kumar Gala
[not found] ` <b639088d50df93caaef8fe7e09c12953b1153ce8.1376596224.git.joshc@codeaurora.org>
[not found] ` <D1534646-7CB5-4EE7-8C1E-1C607BE22396@codeaurora.org>
2013-08-16 19:25 ` [PATCH RFC 3/3] spmi: document the PMIC arbiter SPMI bindings Josh Cartwright
2013-08-16 19:48 ` Kumar Gala
2013-08-16 23:17 ` Stephen Warren
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=20130816195849.GA17974@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gavidov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=joshc@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbohan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=sdharia@codeaurora.org \
/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