Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 22:14:09 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>, Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>,
        rui.zhang@intel.com, lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] hwmon: (lm90) split set&show temp as common codes
Message-ID: <20130717051409.GA16413@roeck-us.net>
References: <1373615287-18502-1-git-send-email-wni@nvidia.com>
 <1373615287-18502-2-git-send-email-wni@nvidia.com>
 <20130712152615.23464a6b@endymion.delvare>
 <20130712135000.GA3386@roeck-us.net>
 <20130712163034.1fc1cd66@endymion.delvare>
 <20130712144011.GC3629@roeck-us.net>
 <51E395D9.6070000@nvidia.com>
 <20130715092415.6d082aa2@endymion.delvare>
 <20130717042618.GA11359@mithrandir>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130717042618.GA11359@mithrandir>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2277
Lines: 51

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:26:20AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 09:24:15AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:25:29 +0800, Wei Ni wrote:
> > > On 07/12/2013 10:40 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 04:30:34PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > >> If that means that for example the ACPI thermal zone is no longer
> > > >> displayed by "sensors", then I strongly object - unless it is
> > > >> explicitly registered as a separate hwmon device from now on, of course.
> > > >
> > > > If I recall correctly that was the idea. Of course, in practice that will mean
> > > > that devices will _not_ get exposed as hwmon devices, as implementers won't
> > > > bother doing both.
> > > > 
> > > >> My idea was to make the bridge optional - you decide when you register
> > > >> a thermal device if it should be exposed as hwmon or not.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that would be a much better solution.
> > > 
> > > I think we can decide it in the DT, we can add a dt property in the lm90
> > > device node, such as:
> > > sys-interface = SYS_HWMON;
> > > or
> > > sys-interface = SYS_THERMAL;
> > > So we register it as the hwmon or thermal device
> > 
> > This is an option, but please keep in mind that DT is not the only way
> > to instantiate LM90-like devices, and we should not expose duplicate
> > inputs by default. It is fine with me if the default is to create only a
> > HWMON device (as the lm90 driver was doing so far), and only
> > DT-instantiated devices have the choice.
> 
> I don't think this information belongs in the device tree. Whether the
> device is exposed as hwmon or thermal device (or both) is entirely a
> software issue whereas DT is a means to describe the hardware.
> 
Correct; this is exactly the type of information which does _not_ belong int
devicetree.

> It seems to me that the earlier proposal of communicating to the bridge
> whether or not a device should be exposed as hwmon device is the right
> thing to do here.
> 
Agreed..

Guenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/