On Friday, October 04, 2013 10:38:10 AM Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 10/04/2013 09:55 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > You're misreading my suggestion. What I'm saying is that it seems like > > it might be useful to have dev_name() return the ACPI name - this would > > mean that everything, including all the dev_ prints, would use the same > > name which would then become stable and tied to hardware. > >> I see. Indeed, this sounds a better idea. At quick look is even more simple. > > Well, this is slightly ambiguous. What exactly do you mean by "ACPI names"? > > > Ah, yes. What I meant as ACPI name was the <bus_id:instance> based ACPI > device name/object (or what is the correct terminology), not the > hardware ID. OK -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
