Re: patch [0/2]: acpi: add generic removable drive bay support

[Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>]

On Friday 08 September 2006 16:33, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:21:23PM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
>  > On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 20:58:42 +0100
>  > Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>  > 
>  > > > can then be used by udev to unmount or rescan depending on the event.  It will
>  > > > create a proc entry under /proc/acpi/bay for "eject" and for "status".  Writing 
>  > > 
>  > > Do we really want it under /proc? It would seem to make more sense for 
>  > > it to be under /sys.
>  > 
>  > I agree - this is under proc because this is an acpi driver, and the acpi
>  > subsystem is still using the /proc fs for driver/user space interface. I
>  > thought I would just conform to their standard.
> 
> It's my understanding from talking with Len that he'd like to see /proc/acpi/
> go away over time, so adding more to it seems to be at odds with that goal.

Dave is right.  We've had a moratorium on new files under /proc/acpi for some time now.
The reason is that user-space should not know or care that something is supplied
by ACPI -- for on other systems it may be supplied by something else.

So new stuff should have generic names under sys -- even if on a large body of
systems the functionality beneath happens to be  supplied via ACPI.

an example of old is the brightness stuff under /proc/acpi and in various platform
specific drivers that scribble under /proc/acpi.
The corresponding example of new is the backlight I/F under /sys.

thanks,
-Len