On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 12:03 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> B
> > HID Sensor Spec defines two usage ids for custom sensors
> > HID_USAGE_SENSOR_TYPE_OTHER_CUSTOM (0x09, 0xE1)
> > HID_USAGE_SENSOR_TYPE_OTHER_GENERIC(0x09, 0xE2)
> > In addition the standard also defines usage ids for custom fields.
> > The purpose of these sensors is to extend the functionality or provide a
> > way to obfuscate the data being communicated by a sensor. Without knowing the
> > mapping between the data and its encapsulated form, it is difficult for
> > an driver to determine what data is being communicated by the sensor.
> > This allows some differentiating use cases, where vendor can provide applications.
> > Since these can't be represented by standard sensor interfaces like IIO,
> > we present these as fields with
> > - type (input/output)
> > - units
> > - min/max
> > - get/set value
> > In addition an dev interface to transfer report events. Details about this
> > interface is described in /Documentation/hid/hid-sensor.txt.
> > Manufacturers should not use these ids for any standard sensors, otherwise
> > the the product/vendor id can be added to black list.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [ ... snip ... ]
> > +static int hid_sensor_custom_add_attributes(struct hid_sensor_custom
> > + *sensor_inst)
> > +{
> > + struct hid_sensor_hub_device *hsdev = sensor_inst->hsdev;
> > + struct hid_device *hdev = hsdev->hdev;
> > + int ret = -1;
> > + int i, j;
> > +
> > + for (j = 0; j < HID_REPORT_TYPES; ++j) {
> > + if (j == HID_OUTPUT_REPORT)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + ret = hid_sensor_custom_add_fields(sensor_inst,
> > + &hdev->report_enum[j], j);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Create sysfs attributes */
> > + for (i = 0; i < sensor_inst->sensor_field_count; ++i) {
> > + j = 0;
> > + while (j < HID_CUSTOM_TOTAL_ATTRS &&
> > + hid_custom_attrs[j].name) {
> > + struct device_attribute *device_attr;
> > +
> > + device_attr = &sensor_inst->fields[i].sd_attrs[j];
> > +
> > + snprintf((char *)&sensor_inst->fields[i].attr_name[j],
> > + HID_CUSTOM_NAME_LENGTH, "%s-%s",
> > + sensor_inst->fields[i].group_name,
> > + hid_custom_attrs[j].name);
> > + sysfs_attr_init(device_attr->dev_attr.attr);
>
> This is wrong -- struct device_attribute doesn't have 'dev_attr' field.
>
> The fix would be trivial, but given the fact that this means that your
> patch hasn't been even compile-tested, I'd like to ask for proper
> resubmission of code you've actually tested.
You found a bug. But it doesn't mean that this is not tested (I submit
100+ patches each cycle related to power and thermal, so this is just a
honest mistake).
This is even tested by ST Micro developer.
The issue is
sysfs_attr_init() is ignored unless CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is defined.
I use Fedora, Ubuntu and Android builds, none of which defined this
symbol. So it slipped away.
So this is a bug, I will resubmit this.
Thanks,
Srinivas
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Jiri Kosina
> SUSE Labs
--
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
