On 02/18/2014 08:07 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 07:41:16 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 02/18/2014 06:55 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
Hi Guenter,
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 17:26:33 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
With the new hwmon API, all attributes have to be created as groups.
Use sysfs_create_group and sysfs_remove_group instead of device_create_file
and device_remove_file to prepare for the new API.
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/hwmon/lm90.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
index 701e952..c3bb771 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
@@ -1057,6 +1057,15 @@ static const struct attribute_group lm90_group = {
.attrs = lm90_attributes,
};
+static struct attribute *lm90_temp2_offset_attrs[] = {
Other groups in this driver use the _attributes suffix, please do the
same for new groups for consistency.
+ &sensor_dev_attr_temp2_offset.dev_attr.attr,
+ NULL
+};
+
+static const struct attribute_group lm90_temp2_offset_group = {
+ .attrs = lm90_temp2_offset_attrs,
+};
+
/*
* Additional attributes for devices with emergency sensors
*/
@@ -1174,6 +1183,15 @@ static ssize_t set_pec(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *dummy,
static DEVICE_ATTR(pec, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, show_pec, set_pec);
+static struct attribute *lm90_pec_attrs[] = {
+ &dev_attr_pec.attr,
+ NULL
+};
+
+static const struct attribute_group lm90_pec_group = {
+ .attrs = lm90_pec_attrs,
+};
I am worried about this. Later in this patch set you'll move the "pec"
attribute from the i2c device to the hwmon class device. However this
attribute is very SMBus-specific, and has nothing to do with hwmon. I
don't think it makes sense to move this attribute, it should stay with
the i2c device. Non-hwmon i2c device drivers could implement it too.
It is specifically mentioned in Documentation/hwmon/lm90, though.
If I separate it to the i2c device, I'll have to come up with some text
explaining where to find the attribute. Is that ok ?
Well I don't even see the current wording as problematic, as it doesn't
say where to find the file and nobody complained. So you could leave
the text untouched, that would be equally fine with me. But if you want
Fine with me. I'll leave it as is.
Guenter
_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
