On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 21:52 -0500, Len Brown wrote: > On Wednesday 28 November 2007 11:28, Thomas Renninger wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 19:03 +0000, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > > > Alexey, > > > > > > > How about character /dev/ec0? > > > > > > Yes, that would be fine. > > > > > > On Tuesday 13 November 2007 18:54:51 Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > > > > What is the benefit of having acer_acpi in userspace, rather than one more > > > > *-laptop in /devices/misc? > > > > > > A debate of "would it be easier for me to maintain an in kernel driver (if/ > > > when I can get it upstream) or a userspace application". At the moment, the > > > idea of a full blown userspace application is just something I'm toying with > > > in my head whilst working on WMI userspace. > > > > I very much like the idea of a general EC debug/devel interface to > > userspace. > > It should be a separate CONFIG, marked "DEBUG", "EXPERIMENTAL" or > > whatever and be per default off. > > It is stupid that everybody who wants to debug a bit on EC registers > > needs to duplicate the IBM EC implementation, this should IMO be moved > > where it belongs to: > > drivers/acpi/ec.c > > > > The question is whether Len will accept/like it, Len? > > > It is crazy to poke ioports from user-space when ec.c thinks it owns them. > So if you're going to do so, it would certainly be an improvement > to go through the driver rather than around it. > > What other users of this interface would there be other than > a user-space version of acer_acpi? > If a user-space driver > were using the I/F, then we couldn't make it a DEBUG-only feature, > it would have to be enabled all the time. I see the "danger" of applications misusing this as an interface and implementing workarounds for unsupported ACPI parts and (this is the real problem) stop working on the real problems or a proper implementation. Especially because this option should be compiled in e.g. OpenSUSE versions, for better remote debugging (comparing EC register values with DSDT Embedded Controller variable implementations on a related problem could help a lot, without the need of digging in the dark for weeks...). >From your comments above, I read out that you tend to accept such an interface as suggested by Alexey? Making it read-only by default, would mainly help debugging purposes and should avoid any workaround implementations. Thomas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
