Re: [PATCH 0/2][RFC] Add SWIG Bindings to libcpupower

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 8/20/24 00:40, John B. Wyatt IV wrote:
> I wanted to follow up on this since I am close to sending out the v2 of
> this patchset.
> 
> 3 points I wanted to raise:
> 
> 1) Does everyone understand, is okay with the SWIG license, and wants to
> proceed with me sending in a more complete version of this as a candidate for
> upstreaming?
> 
> 2) About maintainership: if I am to be the maintainer of this, how would
> myself and John Kacur be listed? As a CPU POWER MONITORING SUBSYSTEM
> maintainer, a separate category below it called CPU POWER MONITORING SUBSYSTEM
> PYTHON BINDINGS maintainer, or is not needed to be listed at this time?
> 
> A quick search for bindings shows what I believe to be all of them for device
> tree. This may establish a new precedent.
> 
> If I was to be added, I assume it would be a separate commit in the v2
> submission?
> 
> 3) I had to comment out powercap_set_enabled
> 
> SWIG reported this symbol not being found despite being in powercap.h. I did a
> quick search and was not able to find it's implementation in powercap.c. The
> get equivalent powercap_get_enabled is in powercap.c. Wanted to check on this
> just in case it is a bug or part of future functionality. I am assuming the
> latter; I would send it v2 with that declaration commented out with a note
> explaining it for users if there is no objection.

Yes please send a complete version for review.

thanks,
-- Shuah