quoted

quoted

I wondered also about DEBUG_FS entries. I can see their value when
developing the driver. But since this is done now, do they really help a
user to debug a difficult case? I am not sure, and then I wonder if we
should have that code in upstream. I am open for discussion, though.

The user wanted to have health monitor implemented on top of the driver.
The user has 16 channels connected the multiple devices. All are operated
using various daemons in the system. Sometimes the slave devices are power down.
Therefor the user wanted to track the health status of the devices.

Ah, then there are these options I have in mind (Wolfram, FYI as well!):
1) push with debugfs as a temporary solution and convert to devlink health protocol [1];
2) drop it and develop devlink_health solution;
3) push debugfs and wait if I²C will gain devlink health support

No need for 2). We can push it now and convert it later. That being
said, I wonder if [1] is suitable for this driver? Things like NACKs and
timeouts happen regularly on an I2C bus and are not a state of bad
health.