Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Sender: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56cc6788-d54b-2f2f-32b2-a318adabf97a@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:51:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] rtc: isl12022: add support for temperature sensor
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>
Cc:     linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220830100152.698506-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <20220921114624.3250848-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <20220921114624.3250848-10-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <8cb2bac1-3a03-09a1-c071-96ca4a95fa44@roeck-us.net>
 <62a262a1-b945-ad4f-fdb8-d05fcba882d3@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
In-Reply-To: <62a262a1-b945-ad4f-fdb8-d05fcba882d3@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/23/22 01:40, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 21/09/2022 16.13, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 9/21/22 04:46, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> 
>>> +static int isl12022_hwmon_read(struct device *dev,
>>> +                   enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
>>> +                   u32 attr, int channel, long *val)
>>> +{
>>> +    if (type == hwmon_chip && attr == hwmon_chip_update_interval) {
>>> +        *val = 60000;
>>> +        return 0;
>>> +    }
>>
>> It is not the purpose of the update_interval attribute to inform the
>> user what the update interval of this chip happens to be. The purpose
>> of the attribute is to inform the chip what update interval it should use.
> 
> Well, I think it's a completely natural thing to expose a fixed and
> known update_interval as a 0444 property, and it might even be useful to
> userspace to know that there's no point reading the sensor any more
> often than that. And I didn't come up with this by myself, there's
> already at least a couple of instances of a 0444 update_interval.
> 

That doesn't make it better. It is still an abuse of the ABI.

Guenter