Hi On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Bryan Wu <cooloney@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > I got it. In this case we need to give the leds device a unique name. > Go back to your patch, you're adding 0, 1 at the end of the name of > leds. It's better like GPIO I think you can pick up <reg> value of > leds device node and put it in front of the name of leds. like > /sys/class/leds/30040000.red and /sys/class/leds/40040000.red. Hmmm.... That will not solve the issue for every device. If I had a mmio, the gpio would be located at /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0/0000:01:00.0/30040000.gpio and /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.0/0000:01:00.0/30040000.gpio Also it could be the case where the gpio is not memory mapped, then it would be something like: /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0/0000:01:00.0/gpio and /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.0/0000:01:00.0/gpio And at any case we should respect the old api, we can only rename the second device, not the first one. What is your concern about the initial proposal? What about NAME_dup0 instead of NAME_0? We could throw a dev_info(), so the system developer will have a chance to fix it (if he can) and the user to ignore it safely. Thanks! -- Ricardo Ribalda -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-leds" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
