From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yu Luming Subject: Re: [gpm] Untangling the sleep hotkey mess Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 11:55:24 +0800 Message-ID: <200601091155.24380.luming.yu@intel.com> References: <3ACA40606221794F80A5670F0AF15F840AA37137@pdsmsx403> <200601091113.16092.luming.yu@intel.com> <20060109032717.GA2238@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060109032717.GA2238-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Richard Hughes , linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, gnome-power-manager-list-rDKQcyrBJuzYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, desktop_portables-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Monday 09 January 2006 11:27, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:13:15AM +0800, Yu Luming wrote: > > Comparing with generic hotkey solution, dev_acpi solution cannot p= revent > > any trouble in terms of supportability, and manageability. > > > > For dev_acpi,=A0 you won't need kernel patch. But you need to know > > everything in AML world from user space. > > We need to know that in any case. The difference is that in the kern= el > case, adding support for new hotkeys requires upgrading the kernel. = In =46rom practical point of view, the acpi hotkey won't change for a qui= te=20 long period. For example, I cannot find too much changes on acpi hotkey= from Thinkpad T21 and Thinkpad T42. And, I don't see any reason for ODM to=20 change their well-know ACPI device PNP ID and well-know AML methods nam= es for acpi hotkey on new platfrom, because they can just implement any platfo= rm=20 changes in AML code.=20 =20 > the case of it adding a new button type that hasn't been seen before= , it > also requires upgrading userspace. If we do it all in userspace, we = only > have one application to fix up in most cases. > > > PS.=A0 According to my testing, windows do have platform specific = hotkey > > drivers. > > In the Windows world, vendors can provide customised distributions o= n a > per-laptop basis. That's not practical in the Linux world. My points is that if hotkey.c become sucessful, then linux won't need t= hose=20 platform specific hotkey drivers for common hotkeys such as brightness= =20 control, volume control, and output switch..=20 Does it make sense? Thanks, Luming - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html