On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 09:09 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > + status = acpi_get_name(als->device->handle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &name);
> > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> > + result = -ENODEV;
> > + goto end;
> > + }
> > +
> > + als->als_sys = als_device_register(&acpi_als_ops, name.pointer, als);
>
> I don't think we should expose the ACPI pathname of the device here.
> If we really need something in sysfs, I think some kind of link to the
> underlying device would be better.
What I mean to say here is that if we need a connection to the ACPI
pathname (and we might, especially for debugging), I think the
connection should be between "ACPI0008:00" and the pathname, not between
something in /sys/class/als/... and the pathname.
Then you could have a link under /sys/class/als/... to the ACPI0008:00
stuff.
Bjorn
--
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
