Re: [RFC] subclasses in sysfs to solve world peace

[Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>]

On Thursday 15 September 2005 20:54, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 08:23:43PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 September 2005 20:04, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > > I like that the child devices are actually below the parent device
> > > and represent the logical structure. I prefer that compared to the
> > > symlink-representation between the classes at the same directory
> > > level which the input patches propose.
> > 
> > Why don't we take it a step further and abandon classes altogether?
> > This way everything will grow from their respective hardware devices.
> 
> Not everything is hardware. :)
> 
> > Class represent a set of objects with similar characteristics. In
> > this regard event0 is no "lesser" than input0. Although they are
> > linked they are objects of the same importance. I do want to see
> > all input interfaces without scanning bunch of directories.
> 
> No problem, how about this:
>   /sys/class/input/
>   |-- input0
>   |   |-- event0
>   |   |   `-- dev
>   |   `-- mouse0
>   |   |   `-- dev
>   |-- input1
>   |   |-- event1
>   |   |   `-- dev
>   |   `-- ts0
>   |   |   `-- dev
>   |-- mice
>   |   `-- dev
>   `-- interfaces
>       |-- event0 ->·../input0/event0
>       |-- event1 ->·../input1/event1
>       |-- mouse0 ->·../input0/mouse0
>       |-- mice -> ../mice
>       `-- ts0 -> ../input1/ts0
> 

I am thinking... the rule would be - when adding a class device if it
has a class_device parent then it gets added to parent's directory and
symlinked into class. Otherwise it gets added into class directory.

I do not want to have a separate subclass_device structure... 

-- 
Dmitry