On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 01:30:51PM +0200, Arnaud Ebalard wrote: > Hi, > > Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hi Arnaud > > > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(pwm1, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, get_pwm, set_pwm); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(pwm1_polarity, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_pwm_polarity, set_pwm_polarity); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(pwm1_mode, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_pwm_mode, set_pwm_mode); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(pwm1_enable, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_speed_control_mode, set_speed_control_mode); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(pwm1_freq, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_pwm_freq, set_pwm_freq); > >> + > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_input, S_IRUGO, get_fan_rpm, NULL); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_alarm, S_IRUGO, get_fan_ooc, NULL); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_alarm_detection, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_ooc_detection, set_fan_ooc_detection); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_fault, S_IRUGO, get_fan_failure, NULL); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_fault_detection, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_failure_detection, set_fan_failure_detection); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_target, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_target, set_fan_target); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_pulses, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_pulses, set_fan_pulses); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_div, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_clk_div, set_fan_clk_div); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_gear_mode, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_gear_mode, set_fan_gear_mode); > >> +static DEVICE_ATTR(fan1_startup_voltage, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, > >> + get_fan_startup_voltage, set_fan_startup_voltage); > > > > It is normal to use SENSOR_ATTR, not DEVICE_ATTR. Take a look at the > > existing fan drivers. > > I will take a look and use SENSOR_ATTR if it is the expected way. For > the records, the g760a.c which I used as basis uses DEVICE_ATTR ;-) > You only need SENSOR_ATTR if you have an index parameter. Otherwise DEVICE_ATTR is just fine. I would actually reject the patch if I notice that it uses SENSOR_ATTR without need for a parameter. Besides, in the context used, it would probably be SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR. > > I also think a lot of these are not needed. They are fixed properties > > of the board and cannot change dynamically. They are set once using DT > > and user space does not need to care. > > I added those knobs for a simple reason: I don't have all the various > characteristics of the target platform I am working on (Netgear > ReadyNAS Duo v2) and needed to be able to test various values w/o > rebooting to get those rights. I thought this knobs would be useful for > people with the same issue (for instance, the new ReadyNAS 102 also has > a G762) and would not hurt. > Testing is not a reason to add non-standard attributes. Thanks, Guenter > Anyway, I will split the patch in two parts and keep the useless knobs > on my side. > > Thanks for your feedback, > > Cheers, > > a+ > _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
