Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread Greg KH 
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:42:55PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> - tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RW(tsl2x7x_power_state);

You do realize you just renamed the sysfs file, changing the user/kernel
api?  That's generally not a good thing to ever do :(

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread Greg KH 
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 01:42:55PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> - tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RW(tsl2x7x_power_state);

You do realize you just renamed the sysfs file, changing the user/kernel
api?  That's generally not a good thing to ever do :(

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread suri 

On Friday 19 May 2017 12:45 PM, Greg KH wrote:

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:33:11PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:

From: Surender Polsani 

Fixed the following checkpatch.pl warnings:
octal permissions are more preferable than symbolic permissions

Replaced DEVICE_ATTR family macros with DEVICE_ATTR_RW family
as suggested by Greg K-H. Changed attributes and function
names where ever required to satisfy internal macro definitions
like __ATTR__RW().


No you did not:


-static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
+static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, 0644,
tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);


???

Wrong patch?



Sorry i sent wrong patch by mistake. I will send correct patch shortly.

Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread suri 

On Friday 19 May 2017 12:45 PM, Greg KH wrote:

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:33:11PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:

From: Surender Polsani 

Fixed the following checkpatch.pl warnings:
octal permissions are more preferable than symbolic permissions

Replaced DEVICE_ATTR family macros with DEVICE_ATTR_RW family
as suggested by Greg K-H. Changed attributes and function
names where ever required to satisfy internal macro definitions
like __ATTR__RW().


No you did not:


-static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
+static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, 0644,
tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);


???

Wrong patch?



Sorry i sent wrong patch by mistake. I will send correct patch shortly.

Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread Greg KH 
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:33:11PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Surender Polsani 
> 
> Fixed the following checkpatch.pl warnings:
> octal permissions are more preferable than symbolic permissions
> 
> Replaced DEVICE_ATTR family macros with DEVICE_ATTR_RW family
> as suggested by Greg K-H. Changed attributes and function
> names where ever required to satisfy internal macro definitions
> like __ATTR__RW().

No you did not:

> -static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, 0644,
>   tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);

???

Wrong patch?

Re: [PATCH v2] staging: iio: light: Replace symbolic permissions as per coding style

2017-05-19 Thread Greg KH 
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:33:11PM +0530, surenderpols...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Surender Polsani 
> 
> Fixed the following checkpatch.pl warnings:
> octal permissions are more preferable than symbolic permissions
> 
> Replaced DEVICE_ATTR family macros with DEVICE_ATTR_RW family
> as suggested by Greg K-H. Changed attributes and function
> names where ever required to satisfy internal macro definitions
> like __ATTR__RW().

No you did not:

> -static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR,
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(power_state, 0644,
>   tsl2x7x_power_state_show, tsl2x7x_power_state_store);

???

Wrong patch?