From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/6] [-mm]: ACPI: duplicate ACPI procfs functions in sysfs Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:08:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20070125120813.GD23343@elf.ucw.cz> References: <1168083306.5619.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1168256428.5754.98.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070108131318.GC25933@elf.ucw.cz> <200701242128.14047.lenb@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:43218 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932884AbXAYMIg (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:08:36 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701242128.14047.lenb@kernel.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Len Brown Cc: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Zhang Rui , Matthew Garrett , linux-pm@osdl.org, "linux-acpi@vger" On Wed 2007-01-24 21:28:13, Len Brown wrote: > On Monday 08 January 2007 08:13, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > > This patch set is against acpi-test sysfs branch which already converts > > > ACPI to follow driver model. Now the ACPI procfs functions are > > > duplicated in sysfs step by step. And I want the ACPI interface in sysfs > > > works exactly the same way as in procfs. > > > > No, you can't port same broken interface into sysfs. Some /proc > > interfaces are horrible, and we do not want to create _exactly same_ > > horrible interfaces in /sys. > > Please be specific. /proc/acpi/alarm is horrible mess, as was detailed in another email from David. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html