* Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs.
@ 2011-03-21 20:02 Jonathan Cameron
2011-03-21 20:14 ` Greg KH
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2011-03-21 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML, Greg KH, David Brownell
Hi All,
Just wondering what the feeling would be about having
a utility function similar to sysfs_streq to provide a
consistent option for all those sysfs attributes out there
where
1, on, true -> 1
0, off, false -> 0
Or does such a beast already exist and I'm just being unobservant?
Jonathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs.
2011-03-21 20:02 Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs Jonathan Cameron
@ 2011-03-21 20:14 ` Greg KH
2011-03-22 10:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2011-03-21 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Cameron; +Cc: LKML, David Brownell
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 08:02:40PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just wondering what the feeling would be about having
> a utility function similar to sysfs_streq to provide a
> consistent option for all those sysfs attributes out there
> where
>
> 1, on, true -> 1
> 0, off, false -> 0
>
> Or does such a beast already exist and I'm just being unobservant?
We have the one in debugfs that I think people use for sysfs. Have you
looked at that?
thanks,
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs.
2011-03-21 20:14 ` Greg KH
@ 2011-03-22 10:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2011-03-22 22:30 ` Greg KH
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2011-03-22 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH; +Cc: LKML, David Brownell
On 03/21/11 20:14, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 08:02:40PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Just wondering what the feeling would be about having
>> a utility function similar to sysfs_streq to provide a
>> consistent option for all those sysfs attributes out there
>> where
>>
>> 1, on, true -> 1
>> 0, off, false -> 0
>>
>> Or does such a beast already exist and I'm just being unobservant?
>
> We have the one in debugfs that I think people use for sysfs. Have you
> looked at that?
>
Thanks for the pointer...
write_file_bool in fs/debugfs/file.c?
What is there is pretty much what is needed, but it's not a general
use function like sysfs_streq. Clearly it would make sense to use
what is there as a basis of such a function.
To save others looking it up, the relevant bit is:
switch (buf[0]) {
case 'y':
case 'Y':
case '1':
*val = 1;
break;
case 'n':
case 'N':
case '0':
*val = 0;
break;
}
There are a few cut and paste copies of this about (mostly in IIO drivers actually
hence why I asking if there is a better way :).
Unless there is demand for it elsewhere I'll just add a utility function to the IIO
core to do this and we can revisit the case for a general function when the need
turns up elsewhere.
Jonathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs.
2011-03-22 10:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
@ 2011-03-22 22:30 ` Greg KH
2011-03-23 10:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2011-03-22 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Cameron; +Cc: LKML, David Brownell
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:59:43AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 03/21/11 20:14, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 08:02:40PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> Just wondering what the feeling would be about having
> >> a utility function similar to sysfs_streq to provide a
> >> consistent option for all those sysfs attributes out there
> >> where
> >>
> >> 1, on, true -> 1
> >> 0, off, false -> 0
> >>
> >> Or does such a beast already exist and I'm just being unobservant?
> >
> > We have the one in debugfs that I think people use for sysfs. Have you
> > looked at that?
> >
> Thanks for the pointer...
>
> write_file_bool in fs/debugfs/file.c?
>
> What is there is pretty much what is needed, but it's not a general
> use function like sysfs_streq. Clearly it would make sense to use
> what is there as a basis of such a function.
>
> To save others looking it up, the relevant bit is:
>
> switch (buf[0]) {
> case 'y':
> case 'Y':
> case '1':
> *val = 1;
> break;
> case 'n':
> case 'N':
> case '0':
> *val = 0;
> break;
> }
>
> There are a few cut and paste copies of this about (mostly in IIO drivers actually
> hence why I asking if there is a better way :).
>
> Unless there is demand for it elsewhere I'll just add a utility function to the IIO
> core to do this and we can revisit the case for a general function when the need
> turns up elsewhere.
The other function that does this, and is what I was thinking of, is
param_set_bool(). Care to merge both of these functions together into
something "sane" and have everyone use it?
thanks,
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs.
2011-03-22 22:30 ` Greg KH
@ 2011-03-23 10:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2011-03-23 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH; +Cc: LKML, David Brownell
On 03/22/11 22:30, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:59:43AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On 03/21/11 20:14, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 08:02:40PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Just wondering what the feeling would be about having
>>>> a utility function similar to sysfs_streq to provide a
>>>> consistent option for all those sysfs attributes out there
>>>> where
>>>>
>>>> 1, on, true -> 1
>>>> 0, off, false -> 0
>>>>
>>>> Or does such a beast already exist and I'm just being unobservant?
>>>
>>> We have the one in debugfs that I think people use for sysfs. Have you
>>> looked at that?
>>>
>> Thanks for the pointer...
>>
>> write_file_bool in fs/debugfs/file.c?
>>
>> What is there is pretty much what is needed, but it's not a general
>> use function like sysfs_streq. Clearly it would make sense to use
>> what is there as a basis of such a function.
>>
>> To save others looking it up, the relevant bit is:
>>
>> switch (buf[0]) {
>> case 'y':
>> case 'Y':
>> case '1':
>> *val = 1;
>> break;
>> case 'n':
>> case 'N':
>> case '0':
>> *val = 0;
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> There are a few cut and paste copies of this about (mostly in IIO drivers actually
>> hence why I asking if there is a better way :).
>>
>> Unless there is demand for it elsewhere I'll just add a utility function to the IIO
>> core to do this and we can revisit the case for a general function when the need
>> turns up elsewhere.
>
> The other function that does this, and is what I was thinking of, is
> param_set_bool(). Care to merge both of these functions together into
> something "sane" and have everyone use it?
Will put out an RFC labeled patch on this and see how it goes down.
Jonathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-23 10:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-21 20:02 Standard handling of boolean attributes in sysfs Jonathan Cameron
2011-03-21 20:14 ` Greg KH
2011-03-22 10:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2011-03-22 22:30 ` Greg KH
2011-03-23 10:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).