Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-22355-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240109135952.77458-1-warthog618@gmail.com> <20240109135952.77458-2-warthog618@gmail.com>
 <CA+kSVo_347gS+w_7ZXFDi9qDtT1aw15qoWRJZAVSkfbHShz7kQ@mail.gmail.com> <20240110130158.GA28045@rigel>
In-Reply-To: <20240110130158.GA28045@rigel>
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 15:27:50 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdY9yXknHVQMq09Ep_y_Hk6iOkNqDS8icAKFW+fLDdwi-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Documentation: gpio: add chardev userspace API documentation
To: Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
Cc: Phil Howard <phil@gadgetoid.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, brgl@bgdev.pl, 
	andy@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 2:02=E2=80=AFPM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 11:40:34AM +0000, Phil Howard wrote:

> > You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, so I'd probably soft=
en to:
> >
> > Before abusing userspace APIs to bitbash drivers for your hardware you =
should
> > read Documentation/driver-api/gpio/drivers-on-gpio.rst to see if your d=
evice has
> > an existing kernel driver. If not, please consider contributing one.
> >
>
> The note is is a rewording of a section of the existing sysfs documentati=
on:
>
>     DO NOT ABUSE SYSFS TO CONTROL HARDWARE THAT HAS PROPER KERNEL DRIVERS=
.
>     PLEASE READ THE DOCUMENT AT Subsystem drivers using GPIO TO AVOID REI=
NVENTING
>     KERNEL WHEELS IN USERSPACE. I MEAN IT. REALLY.
>
> So I've already toned down the vineger.

I wrote that and I recognized the strong wording.

I have come with great regret to the conclusion that it is better to
shout like this,
note that the sentence is not directed to any specific person and that mean=
s
it is more OK to be harsh. It is not feedback to anyone, it is black-and-ye=
llow
warning tape to not go into this dangerous area.

I like the current wording.

Yours,
Linus Walleij