From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.21-rc5-git] make /proc/acpi/wakeup more useful Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:57:49 -0700 Message-ID: <200704171457.50416.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200704031741.42273.david-b@pacbell.net> <20070413155949.GA9157@ucw.cz> <200704171253.02748.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp108.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.198.207]:24363 "HELO smtp108.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1031269AbXDQWAo (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:00:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200704171253.02748.david-b@pacbell.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: Greg KH , Zhang Rui , Andrew Morton , lenb@kernel.org, "linux-acpi@vger" , Linux Kernel list On Tuesday 17 April 2007 12:53 pm, David Brownell wrote: > On Friday 13 April 2007 8:59 am, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > ... > > > Assuming they all adopt that same "parallel tree" model, that seems > > > like a good idea. The tools will likely need to understand how ACPI > > > and OF differ, but there's no point in reserving more names than we > > > really need. Though it may be that "parallel trees" should go away. > > > > If mapping is indeed 1-to-1 in acpi... it would be nice to just merge > > the trees. > > Could you elaborate a bit ... what do you mean by "merge"? > > One way to merge the trees would be to relocate > > /sys/devices/pci* --> ... this *HAS* a PNP node > /sys/devices/pnp*/X --> /sys/devices/acpi_system*/.../X > > Not having the PCI root be its PNPACPI node seems more buglike > to me than anything else. And for other nodes... Looks like the i8042 serial nodes will be bizarre too: /sys/devices/pnp0/00:09 ... touchpad's PNP node /sys/devices/acpi_system:00/device:00/PNP0A03:00/device:15/PNP0F13:00 ... its ACPI node /sys/devices/platform/i8042/serio4 ... its serio node That seems like two nodes too many, but without me trying to twist my mind around i8042 issues, I can't quite speculate why struct serio "is-a" device rather than "has-a" device (the PNP node) as would be the case with a more normal driver structure. But the existence of that device_add() in serio.c sure explains why the PNP node doesn't get associated with the input class device one would expect from knowing that 00:09 is the touchpad. And hmm, just this morning I saw email from Greg re-affirming that drivers should not device_add(). Converting such legacy drivers is simple though, right? :) - Dave