Hi Lee,
On 19-Jun-25 5:17 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025, Hans de Goede wrote:Sorry, my bad, I interpreted your "No need to involve the LED
Hi Lee,Right. It was a reasonable question. Did I imply otherwise?
On 19-Jun-25 11:47 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025, Armin Wolf wrote:Lee, the question here is where put the sysfs attribute to put the lightbar
Am 16.06.25 um 14:46 schrieb Werner Sembach:No need to involve the LED subsystem for a hardware function controlled
Hi, small additonI CCed the LED mailing list so that they can give us advice on which location is the preferred one for new drivers.
Am 15.06.25 um 19:59 schrieb Armin Wolf:
+ functionality.maybe this would be better under the /sys/class/leds/*/ tree if possible
+
+What: /sys/bus/wmi/devices/ABBC0F6F-8EA1-11D1-00A0-C90629100000[-X]/rainbow_animation
+Date: Juni 2025
+KernelVersion: 6.17
+Contact: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@xxxxxx>
+Description:
+ Forces the integrated lightbar to display a rainbow
animation when the machine
+ is not suspended. Writing "enable"/"disable" into this file
enables/disables
+ this functionality.
+
+ Reading this file returns the current status of the rainbow
animation functionality.
+
+What: /sys/bus/wmi/devices/ABBC0F6F-8EA1-11D1-00A0-C90629100000[-X]/breathing_in_suspend
+Date: Juni 2025
+KernelVersion: 6.17
+Contact: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@xxxxxx>
+Description:
+ Causes the integrated lightbar to display a breathing
animation when the machine
+ has been suspended and is running on AC power. Writing
"enable"/"disable" into
+ this file enables/disables this functionality.
+
+ Reading this file returns the current status of the
breathing animation
+ functionality.
by a single register value just because the interface involves an LED.
in breathing mode e.g. which of these 2 should be used? :
1. /sys/bus/wmi/devices/ABBC0F6F-8EA1-11D1-00A0-C90629100000[-X]/breathing_in_suspend
2. /sys/class/leds/uniwill-lightbar/breathing_in_suspend
I think this is a fair question and since 2. involves the LED class userspace
API I also think that asking for the LED maintainers input is reasonable.
FWIW I'm not sure myself. 2. is the more logical place / path. But 2. adds
a custom sysfs attr the LED class device. Whereas 1. adds a custom sysfs attr
in a place where these are more or less expected.
subsystem for a hardware function ..." remark as meaning that
you did not understand why you were Cc-ed.
I now realize that you meant that you believe the control for
this does not need to be under /sys/class/leds/
If it wasn't clear, my vote (this is not a dictatorship) is for 1.Ok, 1. works for me and that is what the patch is already doing,
so lets keep it as as.
Regards,
Hans