Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752547AbaBJRGv (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 12:06:51 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f48.google.com ([209.85.160.48]:38450 "EHLO mail-pb0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751889AbaBJRGs (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 12:06:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140210173811.04ba5964@endymion.delvare> References: <1392045953-26596-1-git-send-email-lpapp@kde.org> <20140210160842.GB26997@lee--X1> <20140210173811.04ba5964@endymion.delvare> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:06:46 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5j8ysxs5IfgvVoxyX1qEY_ey3Ko Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: (max6650) Rename the device ids to contain the hwmon suffix From: Laszlo Papp To: Jean Delvare Cc: Lee Jones , LKML , Guenter Roeck , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Lee, Laszlo, > > On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:08:42 +0000, Lee Jones wrote: >> > In the preparation of creating an mfd driver and then refactor this one into a >> > platform driver in order to add some pinctrl functionality to the chip, it is >> > necessary to start the series with this change so that the mfd driver can refer >> > to the proper name in the subsequent change without making changes in more than >> > one driver later. >> > >> > This was a request from Lee Jones, the MFD subsystem maintainer. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Laszlo Papp >> > --- >> > drivers/hwmon/max6650.c | 4 ++-- >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/max6650.c b/drivers/hwmon/max6650.c >> > index 0cafc39..3c36edc 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/hwmon/max6650.c >> > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/max6650.c >> > @@ -116,8 +116,8 @@ static struct max6650_data *max6650_update_device(struct device *dev); >> > */ >> > >> > static const struct i2c_device_id max6650_id[] = { >> > - { "max6650", 1 }, >> > - { "max6651", 4 }, >> > + { "max6650-hwmon", 1 }, >> > + { "max6651-hwmon", 4 }, > > No, this is not acceptable, sorry. This will change the name of the > hwmon device as seen from user-space, breaking any configuration file > referring to it. Additionally, dashes are explicitly forbidden in hwmon > device names. And lastly this will break any explicit instantiation of > theses devices (which is the only way, as the driver doesn't support > device auto-detection), be it in the kernel itself or from user-space. > > The change doesn't make sense anyway. If you move to the MFD framework, > the core driver will be an I2C driver binding to the I2C device, and it > will spawn the logical devices, presumably in the form of platform > devices. That's what the current max6650 driver would have to bind to. > Just renaming the device won't work, you also need to change the type. Hmm, this paragraph seems to indicate that you have not seen my previous patch set. I tried to summarize in this commit message that the type in this subdriver would need to change, yes. I am fine with not renaming, but appending if such a thing is possible. What does not make sense to me is acquiring a "global" max665x name in a sub-device driver. The children have to be distinguished somehow! > If you want to turn this into an MFD driver, I believe you must first > convert the hwmon part to register using > devm_hwmon_device_register_with_groups(). This will dissociate the i2c > device name from the hwmon device name and create a clean name-space > for each function. Guenter, maybe you had a plan to do so already > anyway? > > That being said, going with MFD in this case seems quite overkill to > me. MFD makes a lot of sense when each function has its own resources. > As this isn't the case here, a single driver registering both an hwmon > interface and a pinctrl interface would seem sufficient to me. But I > think Guenter already discussed this in the past so I'll let him > continue and decide. Exactly. This had been overdiscussed. I took my personal preference without any technical drawback. I prefer clean separation just like several other mfd drivers are doing, really. Tell me this is unacceptable, and I will stop helping with getting the required functionality into the kernel. Frankly, I am getting tired of having worked on it for a few months now, and we are still at discussing personal preferences rather than getting features in ... -- 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/