On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 08:21:58PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 5:05 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Add support for setting debounce on a line via the GPIO uAPI. > > Where debounce is not supported by hardware, a software debounce is > > provided. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- [snip] > > + debounce_period = READ_ONCE(desc->debounce_period); > > + if (debounce_period) { > > + info->attrs[num_attrs].id = GPIO_V2_LINE_ATTR_ID_DEBOUNCE; > > + info->attrs[num_attrs].debounce_period = debounce_period; > > + num_attrs++; > > + } > > + info->num_attrs = num_attrs; > > AFAICT this (reading it in gpio_desc_to_lineinfo) is the only reason > to store the debounce period in struct gpio_desc. I'm wondering if we > can avoid extending this struct only for such uncommon case and store > it elsewhere. In all other cases where you read or write to it - you > have access to the underlying edge detector. Would the single-line > struct line I suggested elsewhere be a good place? On the other hand > I'm not sure how to get it having only the desc. I need to think about > it more. > Yeah, it is stored there so it can be returned by lineinfo_get() for the GPIO_V2_GET_LINEINFO_IOCTL and GPIO_V2_GET_LINEINFO_WATCH_IOCTL. And the same applies to any future config fields. I would also like to not pollute the desc, or anything else in gpiolib, but wasn't sure where else to put it. I'm open to suggestions. Cheers, Kent.