On Thu, 25 May 2017 08:47:47 +0300 Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 24.05.2017 22:27, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Tue, 23 May 2017 11:08:30 +0300 > > Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Having all events enabled by default is misleading. > >> Userspace should explicitly enable events they want to receive. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I agree in principle, but this is a userspace ABI change. Sadly we > > can't do it with out risking breaking userspace code... > > > > One of those we should have caught in review, but now it's there > > we can't actually do anything about it unless we are absolutely > > sure no one will notice! > > I see your point. > > Still, isn't there subsystem-level default that all events are disabled > by default? If such, then current hi8435 state breaks subsystem-level > rules, which is a [userspace-visible] bug. I'm not sure how far should > we go in bug compatibility. It is indeed the subsystem default (as much as we have one) This is a moderately obscure chip for linux systems, do we have a good handle on where it is being used - i.e. are most of the devices under control of people we can discuss this with? > > One crazy idea could be - make default selectable via device tree (with > default set to all-enabled to keep bug-compatibility). But perhaps > that's over-reaction. Yeah, wouldn't fly with the devicetree binding maintainers.. 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
