[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch/rfc 2.6.25-git] gpio: sysfs interface

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 14:55 -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 April 2008, Ben Nizette wrote:
> > 4) Status quo. Easy, efficient, potentially hard to discover which gpio
> > you actually want.
> >
> > My vote's for 1 or 4. The first one is heavier but easier. The last
> > one will need something like the discussed file mapping ranges to gpios.
> My vote is for #4 with a chip listing file.
> I don't like the hacked names ... none of the other /sys/class/*/name
> files on any of my systems use hacked names. The entire motivation for
> name hacking seems wrong to me, and by observation it's been rejected
> for all other class names.

Right, agreed.

I guess one last option (which is made hard by chip label non-uniqueness
but I'll throw out anyway) would be


I guess this doesn't gain much over labelling files chipname:N (and has
the same pitfalls) but does at least seem less hackish.

> - Dave

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-30 01:31    [W:0.125 / U:34.816 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site