From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 3/6] [-mm]: ACPI: duplicate ACPI sleep "alarm" attribute in sysfs Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 05:57:57 +0000 Message-ID: <20070107055757.GB24853@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1168083318.5619.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200701061442.22340.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([217.147.92.49]:49522 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932410AbXAGF6K (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Jan 2007 00:58:10 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701061442.22340.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: David Brownell Cc: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Zhang Rui , lenb@kernel.org, "linux-acpi@vger" , linux-pm@osdl.org On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 02:42:22PM -0800, David Brownell wrote: > On Saturday 06 January 2007 3:35 am, Zhang Rui wrote: > > > > Create /sys/power/alarm. > > Urg. This doesn't work with the RTC framework, which accepts the reality > that some systems have multiple RTCs ... /sys/class/rtc/rtcN/alarm is a > much more appropriate location for that RTC's alarm. Especially since /proc/acpi/alarm is just banging on the RTC registers - the only ACPI thing about it is that the FADT can expose whether or not the extended registers exist, and then making sure that the GPE is enabled. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org