Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Experimenting with channel specification structures.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 03/25/11 15:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 24 March 2011, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> Advantages I can see from this experiement
>>
>> 1) Simple drivers are more consise.
>> 2) It is infact possible to do this for a lot of cases (I had
>> my doubts ;)
>> 3) It gives us many of the rigid constraints that the many
>>    attribute macros now handle in a nice clean form.
> 
> Very nice!
> 
>> Disadvantages:
>>
>> 1) The core code is rather more complex than I'd like.
> 
> Yes, but I think not overly so. Moving complexity from the drivers
> into the core should almost always be worth it in the long run.
> 
> Remember that people who write the drivers should not need to
> worry about many of the complexities of kernel hacking, such
> as sysfs attributes or character devices. The more of that you
> can do in the core, the less work you have helping your downstream
> developers.
My current downstream developers are going to moan about this change ;)
> 
>> 2) There are cases I haven't yet worked out how to handle properly
>>    - for example, our lis3l02dq used to output accel_mag_value
>>    as the threshold value is shared across all high and low threshold
>>    interrupts.  Right now I have no way of specifying this level
>>    of control for the events lines.
>>    Also the use of shared event handlers is clunky to say the least.
>>    This may go away when we rethink the event system though.
> 
> I think reworking the way that event buffers work is quite
> central here, although mostly orthogonal to the rework of the
> internal API.
Next on the list.
> 
>> 3) Putting hard requirements on numeric formatting of some
>>    parameters is a pain. If nothing else I need to write a fixed point
>>    input function.
> 
> Yes, but at least you only need to write it once ;-)
hmph.
> 
>> p.s. Despite Arnd's original thread going to lkml I've kept this
>> on list for now (+ Arnd of course!) because I want to pin it down
>> a bit more before throwing it out more generally. 
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> 	Arnd
> 

--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [X.org]

  Powered by Linux