On 一, 2012-08-13 at 00:34 -0600, R, Durgadoss wrote:
> Hi Rui,
>
> > +
> > > thermal_remove_hwmon_sysfs(tz);
> > > release_idr(&thermal_tz_idr, &thermal_idr_lock, tz->id);
> > > idr_destroy(&tz->idr);
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/thermal.h b/include/linux/thermal.h
> > > index f9ce1e2..1d49f05 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/thermal.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/thermal.h
> > > @@ -173,6 +173,7 @@ struct thermal_zone_device {
> > > struct list_head node;
> > > struct delayed_work poll_queue;
> > > struct thermal_zone_params *tzp;
> > > + struct device_attribute policy_attr;
> >
> > do we need a device_attribute for each thermal zone?
> > I think we can share one static DEVICE_ATTR here.
>
> We need a policy sysfs node per zone. That’s why I put it
> this way, and thought this looks cleaner.
>
> But, as per the implementation point, static DEVICE_ATTR
> would also work. Either ways is fine for me.
>
I'd prefer the static DEVICE_ATTR, which is the way we do for other
attributes like type, mode, temp, etc.
thanks,
rui
--
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
