On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 03:07:21PM +0100, Gabriele Mazzotta wrote: > Hi, > > I decided to remove "als" from input_triggers and created a dedicated > sysfs file for it. Having it there was wrong and misleading. > I also updated the documentation to reflect this change and fixed the > wrong description of als_setting, now used for als_enabled.
Given this is a significant functional change, as opposed to a bug fix, I'm leaning toward reverting the original and adding back the corrected version to 3.20. I'm going to look at the total impact first - let me know if you have a strong argument one way or the other. > > Is returning -ENODEV only when writing to als_enabled the right thing > to do or should it be returned also when reading als_enabled? Why would the als_enabled file exist if it would return ENODEV? If it shouldn't, then returning ENODEV in both cases would be the right thing to do as there is an error present. -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
