On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Nestor Lopez Casado wrote: > > Frankly, I'd really like to avoid any parsing (deciding about collections) > > whatsoever around hidraw, as that was the whole point of creating it in > > parallel to hiddev was simply 'no parsing, raw access'. > > We should avoid naming the new nodes "hidrawX" they could be > "hidvendorX" for instance, or it could also be "hidcolX" where col > stands for collection. We will be moving the "raw" one level down. I am still having trouble seeing how this would work together with current hidraw. In your proposal, there will be both hidrawX and hidcolX existing in parallel, right? Who will be deciding what goes to hidcolX instead of hidrawX? One of the pain points would be -- /dev/hidrawX will have to stay anyway for compatibility reasons, so we can't just divide it to multiple /dev/hidcolX all of a sudden and never look back. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
