Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>/* This is needed untill this gets merged upstream */
>#ifndef __SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR2
>#define __SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR2(_name,_mode,_show,_store,_index,_nr) \
>{ .dev_attr = __ATTR(_name,_mode,_show,_store), \
> .index = _index, \
> .nr = _nr \
>}
>#endif
>
>
>
your macro is nearly identical to one thats already in mainline,
except that your _nr and _index are in a different order.
#define SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR_2(_name,_mode,_show,_store,_nr,_index) \
struct sensor_device_attribute_2 sensor_dev_attr_##_name = { \
.dev_attr = __ATTR(_name,_mode,_show,_store), \
.index = _index, \
.nr = _nr, \
}
also, I understand why you chose the __ to start the macro name,
but Jean has proposed SENSOR_ATTR(), so I sent a patch
to follow that pattern, adding SENSOR_ATTR_2()
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-December/014768.html
I trust that Jean will make a choice for us at some point soon.
