# Re: \[RFC PATCH 01/06\] input/rmi4: Public header and documentation

- From: Christopher Heiny \<hidden\>
- Date: 2012-10-23 23:19:32 
- List: linux-input
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-input/2012/10/3944594
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-input/2012/10/3935135/t.md

```text
On 10/15/2012 11:26 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 05:32:59PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Christopher Heiny [ref] wrote:
>
>>> In previous patch submissions, we always used these warning functions.
>>> But in the feedback on those patches, we were asked to just make
>>> sysfs show/store NULL if the attribute is write/read only.  However,
>>> during their development process, our customers want to see the
>>> warnings if the attributes are accessed incorrectly.  So we made
>>> these warnings a debug option.
>
>> Basically my stance is that you should not lower yourself to the
>> level of others not getting the point of your technical solution
>> by making unelegant compromises, what
>> you should do is to bring them up to your level so they
>> understand that your solution is elegant.
>
> It seems like what you really want to do is add a debug feature to sysfs
> which will optionally complain loudly at bad accesses; obviously it's
> not something that should be there all the time as running then handling
> an error is a perfectly legitimate thing to do.  As with the /CS
> handling it'd mean it was handled at an appropriate level and could be
> reused elsewhere (it might also help make it clear to your customers why
> this is generally bad form).

See my reply to Dmitry of a bit ago.  These are no longer needed, and we'll be dropping them.
```