Re: [PATCH RFC V3.5] leds: trigger: Introduce an USB port trigger

[RafaÅ MiÅecki]

On 25 August 2016 at 10:03, Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/24/2016 07:52 PM, RafaÅ MiÅecki wrote:
>>
>> From: RafaÅ MiÅecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> This commit adds a new trigger responsible for turning on LED when USB
>> device gets connected to the specified USB port. This can can useful for
>> various home routers that have USB port(s) and a proper LED telling user
>> a device is connected.
>>
>> The trigger gets its documentation file but basically it just requires
>> specifying USB port in a Linux format (e.g. echo 1-1 > new_port).
>>
>> During work on this trigger there was a plan to add DT bindings for it,
>> but there wasn't an agreement on the format yet. This can be worked on
>> later, a sysfs interface is needed anyway for platforms not using DT.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: RafaÅ MiÅecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> V2: Trying to add DT support, idea postponed as it will take more time
>>     to discuss the bindings.
>> V3: Fix typos in commit and Documentation (thanks Jacek!)
>>     Use "ports" sysfs file for adding and removing USB ports (thx Jacek)
>>     Check if there is USB device connected after adding new USB port
>>     Fix memory leak or two
>> V3.5: Fix e-mail address (thanks Matthias)
>>       Simplify conditions in usbport_trig_notify (thx Matthias)
>>       Make "ports" a subdirectory with file per port, to match one value
>>       per file sysfs rule (thanks Greg)
>>       As "ports" couldn't be used for adding and removing ports anymore,
>>       there are now "new_port" and "remove_port". Having them makes this
>>       API also common with e.g. pci and usb buses.
>
>
> Now writing new_port with "1-1" produces a file named "1-1" in the
> ports directory with 000 permissions. I think that what Greg had
> on mind by referring to "one value per file" rule was a set of
> files representing ports, like "1-1 1-2 2-1", and each file should be
> readable/writeable.

On the other hand, when I described my idea with "new_port" and
"remove_port", Greg replied with "Maybe", so I'm not sure if he really
got a design you described in his mind.

Greg: could you comment on this sysfs interface, please? :)

-- 
RafaÅ