Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 May 2004 15:10:06 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: two patches - request for comments |
| |
On Sat, May 29, 2004 at 01:20:30AM +0400, Andrew Zabolotny wrote: > Hello! > > I'm going to submit the class_find_device() patch (attached for your > convenience) as a pre-requisite for the backlight/lcd device class patch > (also included so that you can take at it as well) via Russel King (the > backlight/lcd patch is needed for our ARM-based handhelds framebuffer > devices). Any comments/objections are welcome. > > The LCD and backlight device classes were implemented with the following in > mind:
Becides the comments that Todd had about the power management stuff, I have the following comments: - please inline your patches, I can't quote them :( - you create the DEVICE_ATTR macro, why not use the one already created for you (CLASS_DEVICE_ATTR will work I think.) - Don't do a unregister function by passing a string to it. Explicitly pass the pointer of the object that you want to unregister, like all other kernel interfaces do. With that change you no longer need the class_find_device() patch, right? - How about some drivers that actually use this interface? Again, you are creating interfaces with no examples of users of the interface, which isn't acceptable.
thanks,
greg k-h - 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/
| |