Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754254AbZIKJFk (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2009 05:05:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754196AbZIKJFj (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2009 05:05:39 -0400 Received: from ppsw-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.131]:34160 "EHLO ppsw-1.csi.cam.ac.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754150AbZIKJFi (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Sep 2009 05:05:38 -0400 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <4AAA12EC.1090204@cam.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:05:48 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090803) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean Delvare CC: Zhang Rui , LKML , "alan@linux.intel.com" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "pavel@ucw.cz" , "Cory T. Tusar" , "Trisal, Kalhan" , linux-acpi Subject: Re: RFC: Light sensors, unifying current options? References: <4A9FC9D7.20000@cam.ac.uk> <1252308744.3483.414.camel@rzhang-dt> <4AA4F194.1070507@cam.ac.uk> <1252467684.3483.446.camel@rzhang-dt> <4AA79144.8060104@cam.ac.uk> <1252546449.3483.476.camel@rzhang-dt> <4AA8CF57.4010409@cam.ac.uk> <1252634101.3483.514.camel@rzhang-dt> <20090911092049.70887ad0@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20090911092049.70887ad0@hyperion.delvare> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1118 Lines: 24 Jean Delvare wrote: > On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 09:55:01 +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 18:05 +0800, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >>> Some sensors, e.g. tsl2561 use an internal clock to do sampling and hence >>> have some predefined period in which the reading taken doesn't change. >>> Perhaps exporting said period would be useful to userspace? >>> >> I don't think so. >> IMO, the tsl2561 driver should handle this, and there is no need to >> annoy the user space. >> i.e. users always assume the content of "illuminance" attribute is >> valid, and it's the driver's job to make this true. We don't need to >> document this. > > I agree with Rui on this. Let's not delegate everything to user-space, > otherwise it's pointless to write kernel drivers in the first place. Agreed, if anyone has an application they can add the relevant hooks when they need them. -- 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/