From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752071AbZKZSkM (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:40:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752033AbZKZSkJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:40:09 -0500 Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.130]:46211 "EHLO ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751517AbZKZSkD (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:40:03 -0500 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <4B0ECB84.9010503@cam.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:40:04 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091029) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Jean Delvare , Amit Kucheria , List Linux Kernel , rui.zhang@intel.com, alan@linux.intel.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] als: add unique device-ids to the als device class References: <1259237081-4403-1-git-send-email-amit.kucheria@verdurent.com> <1259237186-5459-1-git-send-email-amit.kucheria@verdurent.com> <20091126160713.5e19eb04@hyperion.delvare> <4B0EB891.4010309@cam.ac.uk> <20091126180646.GA9059@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20091126180646.GA9059@suse.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 05:19:13PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >>> That being said... If we want user-space to know what device is there, >>> we may want to still let drivers pass a name string to >>> als_device_register() and let the ALS core create a "name" sysfs >>> attribute returning the string in question. This would be much lighter >>> (for individual drivers) than the previous situation, as the string in >>> question would be a constant (e.g. "TSL2550".) Opinions? >>> >> Makes sense given we want all drivers to support some form of identification. >> We could do it by stating they will all have that attribute, but given it's constant >> will save repetition to put it in the driver. Conversely it might complicate the handling >> of subsequent attribute_groups so I'd probably favour adding relevant documentation lines >> and leaving it up to the drivers to implement this attribute. >> >> Thus we'd require (within reason) all drivers to have illuminance0 and name. > > Why have a name attribute when you can just use the name of the device > itself instead? Isn't that what it is there for? Could do, though I'm not entirely sure all bus types are implementing a name attribute (I may be wrong, but I don't think spi does for example though it might have gone in with the recent device table stuff). We could just specify that it should be present for the device. Jonathan