On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 22:29:41 +0100 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 4:39 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Sadly this doesn't work for many devices. > > It is a common thing for hardware to only support a much smaller > > set of event monitoring registers / threshold detectors than the > > number of channels. In many cases we handle that by working on > > a fifo basis. So what this will do is enable a bunch of events > > which will then be replaced by later events - end result some > > random event will be enabled (or maybe 2 of them across N channels) > > I understand. > > What about augmenting the heuristics like this: > > 1. Count the available events. > 2. If they are just one, then enable that event and disable after use. > > This will make all proximity sensors and other things that just > provide a single event work out of the box. Rather unintuitive interface. I think we are better off just adding a -a parameter like we have for the buffer example. If people get used to it enabling sensible events for a simple device then move on to a more complex one where the heuristic breaks down then they will be very confused. J > > Yours, > Linus Walleij
