Re: [patch] kernel sysfs events layer

[Robert Love]

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 02:07 -0700, Andrew Grover wrote:

> IIRC the two possible future destinations for ACPI events are this,
> and the input layer. There are some ACPI events that clearly should go
> through this mechanism (e.g. thermal), some the input layer (e.g.
> weird laptop extra keys), and maybe some in between? I know David
> Bronaugh was looking into this a few weeks ago, maybe he'll pop back
> up.

Hey, Andy.

I'd like, if possible, to have ACPI use kevents.  ACPI makes sense as a
user.

The first question is whether or not ACPI could use the current kevent
model.  The current reactionary response is that kevent is too limited,
but that misses the point a bit.  The point is that you create kobjects
and better integrate with sysfs, and then kevent becomes trivial.

So if ACPI better took advantage of sysfs, would kevents be sufficient?

	Robert Love


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/