Re: [patch 0/8] Nesting class_device patches that actually work

[Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>]

On Monday 17 October 2005 05:02, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 02:14:23PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> 
> > Sorry, my previous drawing wasn't correct for the input devices.
> > 
> > Here is a new picture of the:
> >   - all classes are unique and flat and will stay the same,
> >     even when the hierarchy of the devices changes
> >   - all hierarchy is _only_ in /sys/devices
> >   - virtual and physical devices are both in /sys/devices
> > proposal.
> 
> I like the layout.
> 
> I'm not completely sure whether mouse0 and event0 are the same class,
> because they have different APIs and protocols. And I believe that class
> is exactly that - a collection of devices where you can use the same API
> to access them. A possibility would be to do it like this:
> 
> > /sys
> > |-- class
> > |   |-- mouse
> > |   |   |-- mice -> ../../devices/mice
> > |   |   |-- mouse0 -> ../../devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input0/mouse0
> > |   |---event
> > |   |   `-- event0 -> ../../devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input0/event0
> > |   |-- input
> > |   |   `-- input0 -> ../../devices/platform/i8042/serio0/input0
> > |   `-- tty
> > |       `-- console -> ../../devices/console
> 
> It might be too much work to create a new class in each of the
> handlers, it'd be similar to harddrives and partititions having
> different classes.
>

This illustrates the problem I have with flat classification: "event" is way
too generic name and "input_event", "input_mouse", etc. is way too ugly.
"input/event", "input/mouse" is much better IMO.

-- 
Dmitry