On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:39:56AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote: > Hello Greg, thanks for the feedback! > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:17 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > And why is this a class and not just a "normal" device and bus? Devices > > live on busses, not generally as a class. Can your devices live on > > different types of busses (USB, PCI, etc.)? > > This patchset can be a bit confusing, because it doesn't just add support for a > single fieldbus device - it proposes a general fieldbus subsystem. Great, then call it a 'fieldbus' class, not "fieldbus_dev' class. Devices can belong to a bus, or a class, so you are fine here. > Fieldbus devices from different vendors can sit on the usb, i2c, pci, etc. > buse, but they all register as a fieldbus device, via fieldbus_dev_register(), > and show up as a fieldbus class member. ok, I'm just complaining about your name in sysfs, not your code :) I think what you did here is correct from a logic point of view. > Userspace can then enumerate all fieldbus devices connected to the system by > looking at the class. Without having to know which bus they happen to be > connected to. Sounds reasonable. nice work, greg k-h
