From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: experimental patch for toshiba_acpi Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:51:52 +0000 Message-ID: <20090225165152.GA5981@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20090225152409.GA4015@srcf.ucam.org> <1235578705.4770.57.camel@penguin.lifesci.dundee.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:44978 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751684AbZBYQv6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:51:58 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1235578705.4770.57.camel@penguin.lifesci.dundee.ac.uk> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jonathan Buzzard Cc: Charles@schwieters.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, john@neggie.net On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 04:18:25PM +0000, Jonathan Buzzard wrote: > Because it makes far more sense to have a user mode program to drive the > features, and for the kernel to provide the necessary thin layer to > access the features. It makes sense for the kernel to provide a consistent abstraction of hardware functionality where possible. Almost every kernel driver could be rewritten in userspace - that doesn't make it a good idea. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org