On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Corentin Chary
<corentin.chary@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Seth Forshee
> <seth.forshee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 09:28:30AM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Seth Forshee
>>> <seth.forshee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> > Changes toshiba_acpi to register an acpi driver and eliminates the
>>> > platform device it was using.
>>>
>>> Why to you want to remove the platform device ? If you want to create
>>> a sysfs interface later, you'll probably need it. Most of the platform
>>> driver I know only use the acpi_device to send proc/netlink events and
>>> the platform_device is used everywhere else. (And anyway, it's an x86
>>> *platform* driver, not a pure acpi driver).
>>
>> I removed the platform device because it seems a bit redundant to have
>> both, and I don't see what benefit it really provides. I see your point
>> that conceptually it makes sense to have it has a platform device,
>> although the distinction there is pretty fine.
>>
>> Anyway, I guess the cost of keeping the platform device in place is
>> pretty small, so I can add it back in if that's desirable.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion, so do what you want (or what Matthew
> will tell you to), but keeping it would allow easier access to
> subdevices (/sys/platform/devices is a better place than
> /sys/bus/acpi/devices/ for this kind of device in my opinion).
>
>>> > Also eliminates most global
>>> > variables, moving them into toshiba_acpi_dev, along with some
>>> > other miscellaneous fixes and cleanup.
>>>
>>> Good ! Next step would be to deprecate the /proc interface (keeping it
>>> for compatibility) and adding a new shinny
>>> /sys/platform/device/toshiba-acpi/ interface correctly documented in
>>> Documentation/ABI/ :).
>>
>> I was avoiding chainging any userspace interfaces in this first round of
>> patches, but deprecating the proc interface is definitely something I'd
>> like to do. I don't know if there's any point to moving it to sysfs
>> though. Most of it already has sysfs interfaces via device classes, and
>> I don't know that there's any value in the rest of it.
>
> Well, I must admit that I didn't check that, and it's possible that
> all you need to do is to deprecate all /proc file if none of them are
> actually usefull.
They were useful, however, the new TOS1900 devices don't support any
of the calls /proc stuff is doing (fan, video, lcd, etc.), and so it seems
to be the new Toshiba standard, as I haven't seen any GHCI device
in a while ('tho I might be wrong...)
>
>> Thanks,
>> Seth
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Corentin Chary
> http://xf.iksaif.net
>
--
-- El mundo apesta y vosotros apestais tambien --
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
