On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:58:52PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > Hi, > > On 03/11/2016 07:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 01:39:43PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > >> On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 15:53 +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > >> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform > >>> index 5172a61..a2261cb 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform > >>> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-platform > >>> @@ -18,3 +18,18 @@ Description: > >>> devices to opt-out of driver binding using a driver_override > >>> name such as "none". Only a single driver may be specified in > >>> the override, there is no support for parsing delimiters. > >>> + > >>> +What: /sys/bus/platform/devices/.../intel_mux > >> Hi, > >> > >> is there any reason to call this "intel_mux"? We want a common interface > >> for such things. So how about "role_mux" or "master_slave_mux"? > > I agree, don't make this intel specific, as it shouldn't be. > > > > By the way, do you expect a class for port mux in sysfs? Why would you create a class? What is that going to do here? What happened to getting internal help in designing this api? This shouldn't be my job :) thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
