Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210405202857.1265308-1-gwendal@google.com> <CAPUE2uvZzXUoG+Fr7c3q0ysMUz0eb36PrdknG37FkG1v2h7zUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPUE2uvZzXUoG+Fr7c3q0ysMUz0eb36PrdknG37FkG1v2h7zUg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@chromium.org>
Date:   Sun, 30 May 2021 22:36:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE_wzQ-bMhrH7pcwNRRTgLFD3opYE2UriU_N=-bu+neq8MHFrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] platform/chrome: Update cros_ec sysfs attribute
 after sensors are found
To:     Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org>
Cc:     Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
        Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Gwendal,

On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 2:01 PM Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> [+dtor]
> Is this change acceptable? I was worried it could break when
> asynchronous probing is used [https://lwn.net/Articles/629895/], but
> since all probes are deferred in a single thread, it is safe.

I think this is a bit awkward that we need to poke a separate sub-driver.

Have you considered having cros_ec_sensorhub.c create its own
attribute group (it does not have to have a name and it looks like one
can register as many unnamed groups as they want) and have wake angle
show and store methods directly in cros_ec_sensorhub.c?

Thanks,
Dmitry