Messages in this thread | | | From | "" <> | Date | Tue, 19 May 2015 17:37:48 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: debugfs: display gpios requested as irq only |
| |
Hi Linus,
On 05/19/2015 05:12 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Grygorii.Strashko@linaro.org > <grygorii.strashko@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 05/18/2015 06:08 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>> GPIOs 160-191, platform/4805d000.gpio, gpio: >>> gpio-171 (<irq-only> ) in hi IRQ-209 >> >> In general agree, but i propose to do it as >> GPIOs 160-191, platform/4805d000.gpio, gpio: >> gpio-171 ((null) ) in hi IRQ-209 <irq-only> >> >> My intention is - this interface could be considered as more or less stable, so >> it is better to add additional information at the end of each line to avoid >> potential breakage of User space SW (test/debug scripts). > > What? If I wanted a stable interface I would use sysfs and document > the ABI in Documentation/ABI/*. > > debugfs is not ABI. > > Debugfs is instable by definition, it is not for production. If tests depend on > it they need to be ready to break and be updated, and in such case > it is a very very good idea to put any such tests in tools/* in the > kernel itself, as does trace-cmd and friends so you can patch the > tests at the same time you patch the code.
Okay. Sorry, My comment was not fully correct - keyword was "more or less stable" and of course it is not ABI.
Any way, the question is till here - How would it better to do? gpio-171 (<irq-only> ) in hi IRQ-209 -- or -- gpio-171 ((null) ) in hi IRQ-209 <irq-only>
Thanks a lot for your comments.
-- regards, -grygorii
| |