Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/6] [-mm]: ACPI: duplicate ACPI procfs functions in sysfs

Zhang Rui
2007-01-26T01:36:56Z

On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 20:51 +0100, 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
> >
> > ditto /proc/acpi/wakeup, and all those empty /proc/acpi directories
>
> Agreed, /proc/acpi/wakeup is unusable/strange/mess, too. I don't get
> that many empty /proc/acpi directories, but I surely hope I'll not see
> them in /sys.
Many /proc/acpi/(drivers)/ may be empty,
e.g. /proc/acpi/ac, /proc/acpi/battery...
This is because that driver entry in procfs is created after driver is
successfully registered. But the actual proc interface is added when a
device is binded to the driver. So when a driver is loaded but no
matchable device is found, we'll leave an empty directory
under /proc/acpi/.
Anyway, we won't have such problems in sysfs.

Thanks,
Rui