On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 13:29 -0800, Sonny Sasaka wrote: > > We need a convention to match the exposed object by the battery > provider and BlueZ's device. I am suggesting that the simplest > convention is to use the same path of the BlueZ's device object, > which > is easy to follow and implement by providers. Otherwise, we would > still need another convention to match them, but I think any other > convention is likely more complex to implement by battery providers. > Can you suggest an alternative convention to match the battery and > the > device? You should match on the interface being available, not the object path. UPower does that, it just watches for ObjectManager signals, and checks whether the expected interface is available when a new object appears: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/upower/upower/-/blob/master/src/linux/up-backend.c#L314-357 There's no reason to care about the object path.
