Dear All, As part of the abi changes, we would need a huge number of macros similar to those currently provided in accel.h, adc.h and friends. Often these actually lead to longer code that one would have if one called the underlying IIO_DEVICE_ATTR and similar macros. Hence I'm after opinions from those working with the subsystem. Are these useful or would we be better served taking the approach of enforcing these naming conventions via review of submitted drivers (similar to hwmon)? Thus we rely on abi documentation rather than the current complex mess of macros. What do people think? I'm certainly not inclined to enforce the use of these macros, particularly in cases like the one I would have added as part of the new abi changes.. IIO_DEV_ATTR_ACCEL_Z_MAG_EITHER_RISING_VALUE(_mode, _show, _store, _reg) vs just using IIO_DEVICE_ATTR directly in the instansiation IIO_DEVICE_ATTR(accel_z_mag_either_rising_value, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR, sca3000_show_thresh, sca3000_write_thresh, SCA3000_REG_CTRL_SEL_MD_Z_TH); If anything the events, particularly the shared cases are even worse. At some point I'm going to end up with an 80 character macro name using the current approach. Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
