On 05/30/2016 02:49 PM, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote: > On 05/29/2016 10:48 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> On 23/05/16 19:40, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote: >>> The trigger name is documented as unique but drivers are currently >>> allowed to register triggers with duplicate names. This should be >>> considered a bug since it makes the 'current_trigger' interface >>> unusable. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@xxxxxxxxx> >> This feels like the right approach to my mind (and should have been there >> all along - oops). >> >> However, we do need to avoid breaking userspace. It's ugly but for those 3 drivers >> can we assume that using more than one on a board was impossible before this series >> and as such play a slight game in which we don't change the trigger name they >> are exporting, unless that name is already in use? >> >> It's ugly but it gets us the nicest solution for all drivers for a bit of ugly in >> 3 of them... > > How would that look like? I guess I could handle -EEXIST from > iio_trigger_register and try again with another name? Unfortunately the > name is initialized at alloc time while uniqueness can only be checked > at register time. This would require some refactoring in drivers for > devices I don't have. > > An alternative would be to just submit patches 4/5 and only give a > warning when non-unique trigger names are used. After all, iio device > names are not unique, the easy way would be to give up on this guarantee > for trigger names as well. > I'd say apply this patch keep things as they are in the drivers and if somebody creates a board with more than one of those devices let them come up with a fix. -- 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
