Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756108Ab0KOGlZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 01:41:25 -0500 Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:41307 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755187Ab0KOGlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 01:41:23 -0500 Message-ID: <6100C6C94F5440C290CEC343F20F503F@wipblrx0099946> From: "Hemanth V" To: "Dmitry Torokhov" Cc: "Jonathan Cameron" , "LKML" , , , "Manuel Stahl" , "Jean Delvare" , "Greg KH" , "Alan Cox" , "Andrew Morton" , , , "Donggeun Kim" References: <7BC12C510D794F198DFA5A5C104CD7B6@wipblrx0099946> <20101112173227.GB1224@core.coreip.homeip.net> Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:10:34 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2388 Lines: 66 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dmitry Torokhov" Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:02 PM Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:34:36PM +0530, Hemanth V wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hemanth V" >> To: "Jonathan Cameron" ; "Dmitry Torokhov" >> >> >> >> >----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Cameron" >> > >> >To: "Jonathan Cameron" >> >Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:36 PM >> >Subject: Re: Sensor event related attribute naming. >> > >> > >> >>Given the lack of further comment, I went ahead and implemented >> >>the above naming >> >>scheme for IIO. As the above discussion with Hemanth shows, >> >>there are some corner cases >> >>that will need futher thought in the future. >> >> >> > >> >Jonathan, haven't seen many comments on this. Do u think the reason >> >might be that these interfaces are hidden behind a HAL layer like >> >in android and >> >might not be a burning issue for many people. >> > >> >> Dmitry, could you let us know your thoughts on this too. >> Would using a HAL layer be better compared to creating a standard >> sysfs interface, as it seems to be the popular approach. >> > > Hemanth, > > I do not really see the difference between sysfs interface and HAL > interface. They both abstract hardware details and bring them to common > denominator. If you guys can agree on HAL interface I trust sysfs should > be possible too ;) > > BTW, the reason I do not comment on sysfs accelerometer infrastructure > is because it is not topic I am vested in, my time budget barely covers > pure input matters. So as long as there is something that is common and > shared between drivers I would be good with it; you guys need to decide > on details, please. > Dmitry, thanks for the clarification, just wanted to make sure everyone is on the same page. As you had suggested, I will push the cma3000 driver without the sysfs interface. I will parallely work with Jonathan to come up with a standard sysfs interface. Thanks Hemanth -- 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/