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? confused, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
