Hello.
On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 10:14, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 00:26 +0100, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 15:00, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > >
> > > I did have different dock/undock events a few months ago - but
> > > after some discussion we scrapped them because Kay wants to avoid driver
> > > specific events. The "change" event is the only thing that makes sense,
> > > given the set of uevents available right now, and userspace should be
> > > able to handle checking a file to get driver specific details (i.e. dock
> > > and undock status). If you have a specific reason why this won't work,
> > > let me know.
> >
> > It's fine with me. I just find two different events more handy.
> > Checking the file after the event in userspace should not be aproblem.
>
> The thing is that we try to avoid driver-core "features" that are
> specific to a single subsystem or driver.
>
> You can easily add additional environment variables today, while sending
> a "change"-event with kobject_uevent_env(), like
> ACPI_DOCK={lock,unlock,insert,remove,...}. Just pass any driver-specific
> string you like along with the event, and it will be available just like
> the "action" string.
Thanks for the explanation. I can live with both solutions. It's up to
Kristen.
> This should fit all requirements, without the need to introduce all
> sorts of new generic action-strings, that can almost never be changed
> later for compatibility reasons. That way, if "drivers" later find out,
> that they need to send different actions/flags, they can just add as
> many new strings as they like on top of the event. :)
Fair enough.
regards
Stefan Schmidt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
