On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, at 6:10 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> I don't know why you dropped Mario and the list, I reinstanstated those
> two.
Unintentional - sorry. Hit the reply button instead of reply-all and didn't notice. Doh.
>
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2024, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024, at 9:56 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>> > On Tue, 19 Nov 2024, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> >
>> >> Reading and writing the `profile` sysfs file will use the callbacks for
>> >> the platform profile handler to read or set the given profile.
>> >>
>> >> Tested-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> v7:
>> >> * Remove extra handler set
>> >> * Remove err variable
>> >> v6:
>> >> * Fix return
>> >> v5:
>> >> * Drop recovery flow
>> >> * Don't get profile before setting (not needed)
>> >> * Simplify casting for call to _store_class_profile()
>> >> * Only notify legacy interface of changes
>> >> * Adjust mutex use
>> >> ---
>> >> drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >> 1 file changed, 100 insertions(+)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>> >> index 9d6ead043994c..1530e6096cd39 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
>
>> >> static struct attribute *profile_attrs[] = {
>> >> &dev_attr_name.attr,
>> >> &dev_attr_choices.attr,
>> >> + &dev_attr_profile.attr,
>> >
>> > I started to wonder if "choices" is good name for the other attribute as
>> > it is the set of values "profile" accepts? Should they be bound by the
>> > naming too like "profile_choices" or something along those lines so the
>> > connection between the two is very evident?
>> >
>> Wouldn't it be weird to not have it in sync with the main sysfs entry
>> (which I don't think we can change at that point without messing up
>> userspace).
>>
>> I think it would be more confusing to have different naming as it would
>> imply they're different things.
>
> Ah, I didn't realize there's a pre-existing convention. Then just
> disregard what I suggested.
>
No idea if it's a convention - I just would think it would be confusing for users.
Thanks
Mark
