On 8/29/21 2:09 PM, Chris Packham wrote:
On 28/08/21 9:29 am, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 02:41:21PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote:
Instead of the non-standard auto_update_interval make use of the
update_interval property that is supported by the hwmon core.
Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Notes:
I kind of anticipate a NAK on this because it affects the ABI. But I figured
I'd run it past the ML to see if moving towards the hwmon core is worth the hit
in ABI compatibility.
I personally don't mind (most likely no one is using it anyway), but let's
wait until after the upcoming commit window closes to give people time to
complain.
I know of one application using this sysfs entry. But it's our in-house
environmental monitoring code so if this gets merged I'll just update it
to use the new path.
One thought I had was we could do both. i.e. have an entry that conforms
to the hwmon core and a backwards compatible entry that just aliases the
new path.
Now you almost convinced me to indeed reject this patch. The idea of the new API
is to simplify driver code, not to make it more complicated. If we can't simplify
the code, it is better to leave it alone.
Guenter
