On 11/07/2016 07:37 PM, Corey Minyard wrote:
> Sorry, I was at Plumbers and extra busy with other stuff. Just getting around to reviewing this.
>
> On 11/02/2016 02:57 AM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> We could also use an ioctl for that purpose. sysfs seems a better
>> approach.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/char/ipmi/bt-bmc.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/bt-bmc.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/bt-bmc.c
>> index e751e4a754b7..d7146f0e900e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/bt-bmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/bt-bmc.c
>> @@ -84,6 +84,33 @@ struct bt_bmc {
>> static atomic_t open_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>> +static ssize_t bt_bmc_show_response_time(struct device *dev,
>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>> + char *buf)
>> +{
>> + struct bt_bmc *bt_bmc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> +
>> + return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE - 1, "%d\n", bt_bmc->response_time);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static ssize_t bt_bmc_set_response_time(struct device *dev,
>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>> + const char *buf, size_t count)
>> +{
>> + struct bt_bmc *bt_bmc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> + unsigned long val;
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + err = kstrtoul(buf, 0, &val);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>> + bt_bmc->response_time = val;
>> + return count;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static DEVICE_ATTR(response_time, 0644,
>> + bt_bmc_show_response_time, bt_bmc_set_response_time);
>> +
>> static u8 bt_inb(struct bt_bmc *bt_bmc, int reg)
>> {
>> return ioread8(bt_bmc->base + reg);
>> @@ -572,6 +599,10 @@ static int bt_bmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> bt_bmc_config_irq(bt_bmc, pdev);
>> bt_bmc->response_time = BT_BMC_RESPONSE_TIME;
>> + rc = device_create_file(&pdev->dev, &dev_attr_response_time);
>> + if (rc)
>> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "can't create response_time file\n");
>> +
>
> You added an extra space here.
yes. I will remove it in the next version.
The patch raises a few questions on the "BT Interface Capabilities" :
- should we use sysfs or a specific ioctl to configure the driver ?
- should the driver handle directly the response to the "Get BT
Interface Capabilities" command ?
What is your opinion ?
Thanks,
C.
>> if (bt_bmc->irq) {
>> dev_info(dev, "Using IRQ %d\n", bt_bmc->irq);
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
