On Tuesday 15 January 2008 20:38, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > On Tuesday 15 January 2008 20:54:29 Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > If there is a [planned] WMI sysfs device then I think input device should > > use it to form proper sysfs hierarchy. What are the roadblocks for getting > > WMI sysfs in? > > The question is, would exporting the GUID virtual device and using that as the > parent make more sense? So, in the case of hp-wmi, it only uses the GUID > 95F24279-4D7B-4334-9387-ACCDC67EF61C, so should we use the virtual device > associated with that GUID as the parent, or just have WMI itself as the > parent device? I'm really not sure which would be the better way to go. Why not used generic names like dev0, dev1 etc. and have the guid be an attribute? > Unfortunately, as you can see, a GUID is a 36 character string, which is > longer than the current 20 byte length of bus_id in a 'struct device'; so > either we have to have a temporary hack to shorten the GUID length when > creating the device, or wait for bus_id to switch to a variable length > (although it's not certain if this change will hit 2.6.25, or will be put off > until 2.6.26). > > -Carlos - 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
