From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Starikovskiy Subject: Re: [RFC] EC registers - Adding sysfs interface? Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:25:06 +0300 Message-ID: <474DB282.4050003@gmail.com> References: <200711131724.31868.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <200711131849.56964.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <4739F2FB.9080800@suse.de> <200711131903.03018.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <1196267304.23251.165.camel@queen.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]:44140 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751732AbXK1SYu (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:24:50 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z38so1583741ugc for ; Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:24:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1196267304.23251.165.camel@queen.suse.de> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: trenn@suse.de Cc: Carlos Corbacho , Alexey Starikovskiy , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , Len Brown Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 19:03 +0000, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > >> Alexey, >> >> >>> How about character /dev/ec0? >>> >> Yes, that would be fine. >> >> On Tuesday 13 November 2007 18:54:51 Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: >> >>> What is the benefit of having acer_acpi in userspace, rather than one more >>> *-laptop in /devices/misc? >>> >> A debate of "would it be easier for me to maintain an in kernel driver (if/ >> when I can get it upstream) or a userspace application". At the moment, the >> idea of a full blown userspace application is just something I'm toying with >> in my head whilst working on WMI userspace. >> > > I very much like the idea of a general EC debug/devel interface to > userspace. > It should be a separate CONFIG, marked "DEBUG", "EXPERIMENTAL" or > whatever and be per default off. > It is stupid that everybody who wants to debug a bit on EC registers > needs to duplicate the IBM EC implementation, this should IMO be moved > where it belongs to: > drivers/acpi/ec.c > > The question is whether Len will accept/like it, Len? > > Having it as /dev/ec0 should not introduce too many problems... Also, it has much smaller impact than /dev/mem or /dev/ioport... Regards, Alex.