From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753242Ab0IUFqx (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:46:53 -0400 Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:33105 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752167Ab0IUFqu (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Sep 2010 01:46:50 -0400 Message-ID: <007601cb5950$55d52980$LocalHost@wipblrx0099946> From: "Hemanth V" To: "Jonathan Cameron" , "Dmitry Torokhov" Cc: , , References: <61033.10.24.255.18.1283926671.squirrel@dbdmail.itg.ti.com> <4C877584.7000902@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk> <20100914080003.GD15167@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4C8F7429.1080105@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] input: CMA3000 Accelerometer driver Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:16:25 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3598 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Cameron" To: "Dmitry Torokhov" Cc: "Hemanth V" ; ; ; Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 6:40 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] input: CMA3000 Accelerometer driver > On 09/14/10 09:00, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 12:37:40PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >>> >>> I'm happy to see your driver go in as it is currently, what bothers me >>> is that we will end >>> up with incompatible interfaces for all the accelerometers Dmitry takes! >>> >> >> This is a valid concern. How about I chicken out and will not merge any >> new sysfs knobs until you guys decide on reasonable interface? Most set >> up is done by board code anyways, sysfs is more of nice-to-have? > Hemanth, would removing the sysfs hooks from this driver be ok with you? > I'd personally have favoured a merge, add new interfaces when agreed and > deprecate old ones approach, but it is Dmitry's call. Perhaps it is > better > to get the majority of the device functionality in place now and add > the bells and whistles later. > > For input device things are probably mostly fixed for a particular board > design. There are definitely interesting things one can do if the knobs > are available but they (I think) mostly fall outside of using the device > for input! > Dmitry, Jonathan I am ok to remove the sysfs entries for now, but would cause some limitations like not being able to change sampling frequency / disabling interrupts runtime. Wanted to clarify if the intention is to come up with a standard sysfs interface for all accelerometer drivers under input/misc including adxl34x. Thanks Hemanth