On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:00:40PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 12:38:02PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > This is one of the reasons why we currently use tracepoints (they just > > don't have this issue as they're trivial to filter), though > > adding some sort of infrastructure for it ought not to be too difficult > > even if it's just at the regmap level. > So a /sys/kernel/debug/regmap/<device>/io_printk attribute (with a > better name) to enable debug printks in io paths > (regmap*{read,write,update} outside of mutex) in regmap.c would be > acceptable? Yes, that'd be totally fine for me - it's debugfs so we can always drop it later if someone comes up with a better idea or something. > > Actually, the other question I had but forgot to ask (or I think punted > > on for your response) was why these are in sysfs at all - things like > > which things are connected to the backlight are going to be a property > > of the board design so should be defined by the machine not tweaked from > > userspace. > I agree with you and the reason is the same as for the max_current > attribute (discussed in the other thread) -- it was an explicit request > from the end customer. > I could replace the boost attributes with a platform_data entry where it > really belongs. I really think this is much better for mainline. > There is a use case (beyond testing/integration) for keeping the (lvled) > outputs configurable from userspace, in that it provides a way to > synchronise LED activity such as blinking. So I still want to keep those, > at least for the lvleds. I'm not sure exactly which control that is?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel