On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 08:56:11AM +0100, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > On 02/19/2015 10:40 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:02:04AM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote: > >>On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:47:47PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > >>> > >>>On Wed 2015-02-18 17:20:22, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > >>>>Add a documentation of LED Flash class specific sysfs attributes. > >>>> > >>>>Signed-off-by: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>Cc: Bryan Wu <cooloney@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>>Cc: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>>NAK-ed-by: Pavel Machek > >>> > >>>>+What: /sys/class/leds/<led>/available_sync_leds > >>>>+Date: February 2015 > >>>>+KernelVersion: 3.20 > >>>>+Contact: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>+Description: read/write > >>>>+ Space separated list of LEDs available for flash strobe > >>>>+ synchronization, displayed in the format: > >>>>+ > >>>>+ led1_id.led1_name led2_id.led2_name led3_id.led3_name etc. > >>> > >>>Multiple values per file, with all the problems we had in /proc. I > >>>assume led_id is an integer? What prevents space or dot in led name? > >> > >>Very good point. How about using a newline instead? That'd be a little bit > >>easier to parse, too. > > > >No, please make it one value per-file, which is what sysfs requires. > > The purpose of this attribute is only to provide an information about > the range of valid identifiers that can be written to the > flash_sync_strobe attribute. Wouldn't splitting this to many attributes > be an unnecessary inflation of sysfs files? Ok a list of allowed values to write is acceptable, as long as it is not hard to parse and always is space separated. > Apart from it, we have also flash_faults attribute, that currently > provides a space separated list of flash faults that have occurred. That's crazy, what's to keep it from growing and growing to be larger than is allowed to be read? > If we are to stick tightly to the one-value-per-file rule, then how > we should approach flash_faults case? Should the separate file be > dynamically created for each reported fault? I think you need to use something other than sysfs here, sorry. uevents for your faults? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
