Hi Guenter,
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
On 07/04/2018 08:16 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> + /* Disable if last sensor in the group */
>> + send_command = true;
>> + for (i = 0; i < sg->nr_sensor; i++) {
>> + struct sensor_data *sd = sg->sensors[i];
>> +
>> + if (sd->enable) {
>> + send_command = false;
>> + break;
>> + }
>
> This is weird. So there are situations where a request to disable
> a sensor is accepted, but effectively ignored ? Shouldn't that
> return, say, -EBUSY ?
This is because we do not support per-sensor enable/disable. We can only
enable/disable at a sensor-group level.
This patch follows the semantic to disable a sensor group iff all the sensors
belonging to that group have been disabled. Otherwise the sensor alone is marked
to be disabled and returns -ENODATA on reading it.
And a sensor group will be enabled if any of the sensor in that group is enabled.
I will make changes to the remaining code according to your suggestion.
Thanks and Regards,
Shilpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hwmon" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
