On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 10:00:26PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 4:00 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Thanks a lot for doing this! > I hope it makes sense - I've been polishing it for a while to the point that I might be missing the forest for the trees. > ... > > > Documentation/userspace-api/gpio/chardev.rst | 114 ++++++++++++++++ > > .../userspace-api/gpio/chardev_v1.rst | 129 ++++++++++++++++++ > > Shouldn't it be better to have chardev_v2.rst along with chardev.rst > to be a link to it? > Didn't see any benefit to doing that. As I see it, chardev.rst will always be the latest. If we do ever do a v3 then this doc will get the renaming and link treatment then. > ... > > May we actually state in the documentation that sysfs is subject to > remove at some point? > So formally define what "deprecated" means? Is that covered in the higher level documentation somewhere? If so I'm more than happy to provide a reference. Cheers, Kent.