[PATCHv5 0/3] Introduce the /proc/socinfo and use it to export OMAP data
maxime.coquelin-nonst at stericsson.com
Mon Feb 28 05:28:15 EST 2011
On 02/16/2011 12:57 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Hello Linus,
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 01:58:00PM +0100, ext Linus Walleij wrote:
>> 2010/5/11 Eduardo Valentin<eduardo.valentin at nokia.com>:
>>> Here is the version 5 of the change to export OMAP data to userspace
>>> (name, revision, id code, production id and die id).
>>> Basically, this version is still attempting to create a new file under /proc.
>>> It is the /proc/socinfo, which should be used to export bits which are SoC specific
>>> (not CPU related, nor machine related).
>>> So, differences between previous version are:
>>> - merged patch 02/04 with 03/04 to avoid compilation breakages.
>>> - simplified the seq_file usage by using the single_open and single_release functions
>>> - exported a function to register a seq_operation .show callback
>>> - adapted the changes accordingly
>>> As usual, comments are welcome.
>> Eduardo, what has happened to this patchset?
> Got forgotten :-(. Unfortunately I didn't pushed it hard enough.
I propose to refactor your patchset, moving from procfs to sysfs.
>> Do you want help in picking it up and try to polish it up?
> Yeah, but it would need a refactoring. IIRC, result of last discussion was that
> we should not mess with /proc. So, maybe moving back to something under sysfs.
> Perhaps /sys/devices/soc or so?
About the location of this new sysfs entry, where do you think it should be?
I propose to create a new directory named "soc" in /sys/devices/system/.
As platform vendors have several/different kind of IDs to export to
sysfs, I propose each vendor to create file entries related to their IDs
(eg. /sys/devices/system/soc/idcode for OMAP platforms).
However, I think we should have a common file entry to export the unique
ID of the platforms. Indeed, user-space applications should have a
unified way to get this kind of ID, regardless of the platform (eg.
Do you agree with my proposal?
Thanks for your comments.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel