Hi Guenter,
> > switch (index) {
> > + case 0: /* temp1_input */
> > + if (drv->get_temp)
> > + mode |= S_IRUGO;
>
> This should be mandatory. Sorry, I don't really understand what you are
> trying to accomplish here.
>
> Can you give me a real world example where a chip would support setting
> a limit but not reading it ?
I have no such example. I just did not see why this couldn't be allowed
(e.g. setting only set_temp_limit and get_temp_alarm looks fine to me).
But if you say that get_temp should be mandatory, I'm OK with that.
The primary goal of this patchset was to use DEVICE_ATTR_RW to declare
temp1_max, instead of reflecting the minimal permissions needed.
Best,
-v
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
