Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 01 Dec 2014 14:58:56 +0100 | From | Jacek Anaszewski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC v8 02/14] Documentation: leds: Add description of LED Flash class extension |
| |
Hi Pavel,
On 12/01/2014 02:04 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > >>> How are faults cleared? Should it be list of strings, instead of >>> bitmask? We may want to add new fault modes in future... >> >> Faults are cleared by reading the attribute. I will add this note. >> There can be more than one fault at a time. I think that the bitmask >> is a flexible solution. I don't see any troubles related to adding >> new fault modes in the future, do you? > > I do not think that "read attribute to clear" is good idea. Normally, > you'd want the error attribute world-readable, but you don't want > non-root users to clear the errors.
This is also V4L2_CID_FLASH_FAULT control semantics. Moreover many devices clear the errors upon reading register. I don't see anything wrong in the fact that an user can clear an error. If the user has a permission to use a device then it also should be allowed to clear the errors.
> I am not sure if bitmask is good solution. I'd return space-separated > strings like "overtemp". That way, there's good chance that other LED > drivers would be able to use similar interface...
The format of a sysfs attribute should be concise. The error codes are generic and map directly to the V4L2 Flash error codes.
Best Regards, Jacek Anaszewski
| |