On 9/17/2020 10:04 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 9/17/20 3:36 PM, Mark Pearson wrote:
Hi all,
<snip>
One question - the main reason for a common interface is for user
space to not deal with a mess of APIs.
Correct.
Is it worth me doing a simplified version of my patch (maybe using
debugfs?) so I can expose the modes to users whilst we work on the
common solution? I'm assuming there is no mileage in getting my patch
(with the fix I owe Benjamin) in and then changing it in the future
once the generic solution is available as that potentially messes up
userspace too much?
Using debugfs as an intermediate solution is a good idea. debugfs
interfaces have no ABI guarantees, so we can simply drop it when the
generic stuff lands.
Great. I'll look at that as an alternative for the short term.
Something as a stopgap measure that won't annoy the kernel community
but is good for Linux users as I'm guessing the generic solution is
likely to be months away
The generic solution will definitely not make the 5.10 kernel, but 5.11
is not entirely out of the question, although to be honest 5.12 seems
more realistic.
OK.
<snip>
I guess we should also add an optional lap_mode sysfs attribute
to the class-device, to have all the info for the Thinkpads in
one place.
I'm good with this too - but the lapmode patch is accepted and there
is the palm sensor patch too which I'm hoping is accepted soon. Whilst
I'm happy to make them part of this implementation (if they fit) I'd
appreciate if they didn't get removed or held up as they're needed for
our WWAN implementation which is already overdue.
The main consumer there will be our WWAN enablement utility and we can
change that to support different API if needs be :)
As the rest of the dicussion has shown the lap_mode thingie indeed is
best left in place as a
thinkpad_acpi only interface for now.
I guess the same applies to the palm_sensor stuff. We may want to
advertise that through
some standardize API later, but for now we can just use a thinkpad_acpi
specific API and
then also export the info through the standardized API later, as we will
do for the
lcdshadow stuff.
Sounds good.
Happy to work on that too in the future
Mark
