On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 01:33:53PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 9/28/22 12:47, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 10:45:21PM +0200, Armin Wolf wrote:
...
> >> + default m
> >
> > Why? (Imagine I have Dell, but old machine)
>
> Then you can select N if you really want to.
>
> > (And yes, I see that other Kconfig options are using it, but we shall avoid
> > cargo cult and each default choice like this has to be explained at least.)
>
> This has been discussed during the review of v1 already.
>
> There are quite a few dell modules and the choice has
> been made to put these all behind a dell platform drivers
> options and then default all the individual modules to 'm'.
Okay, thanks for pointing out that this was discussed. I was not aware.
...
> >> + kfree(obj);
> >
> > I'm wondering what is the best to use in the drivers:
> > 1) kfree()
> > 2) acpi_os_free()
> > 3) ACPI_FREE()
> > ?
>
> Most ACPI driver code I know of just uses kfree() the other 2
> are more ACPI-core / ACPICA internal helpers.
To me 2) would look more consistent, esp. in case if it is extended in
the future.
...
> >> + ret = device_create_file(&battery->dev, &data->temp_attr);
> >> + if (ret < 0)
> >> + return ret;
> >> +
> >> + ret = device_create_file(&battery->dev, &data->eppid_attr);
> >> + if (ret < 0) {
> >> + device_remove_file(&battery->dev, &data->temp_attr);
> >> +
> >> + return ret;
> >> + }
> >
> > Why dev_groups member can't be utilized?
>
> Because this is an extension to the ACPI battery driver, IOW
> this adds extra attributes to the power-supply-class device
> registered by the ACPI battery driver. Note that the device
> in this case is managed by the power-supply-class code, so
> there is no access to dev_groups even in the ACPI battery code.
Ah, I see now, so we extend the attributes of the 3rd party driver here.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
