From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: dtor_core@ameritech.net
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Remove input_call_hotplug
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:16:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41EE6BA8.6020705@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d120d500050119060530b57cd7@mail.gmail.com>
Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Hannes,
>
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:59:30 +0100, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> wrote:
>
>>Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>
>>>But the real question is whether we really need class devices have
>>>unique names or we could do with inputX thus leaving individual
>>>drivers intact and only modifying the input core. As far as I
>>>understand userspace should be concerned only with device
>>>capabilities, not particular name, besides, it gets PRODUCT string
>>>which has all needed data encoded.
>>>
>>
>>Indeed. What about using 'phys' (with all '/' replaced by '-') as the
>>class_id? This way we'll retain compability with /proc/bus/input/devices
>>and do not have to touch every single driver.
>>
>
>
> I want to kill phys at some point - we have topology information
> already present in sysfs in much better form. Can we have a new
> hotplug variable HWDEV= which is kobject_path(input_dev->dev). If
> input_dev is not set then we can just dump phys in it. And the class
> id will still be inputX. Will this work?
>
Sure. And we don't need a special HWDEV variable, as there is already a
PHYSDEVPATH variable providing exactly this information.
I'm not too happy about this 'inputX' thing (as this doesn't carry any
information, whereas 'phys' gives you at least a rough guess what this
device's about), but if phys is to go it would be the logical choice.
> Btw, I really doubt that topology information is important here as the
> only thing that one needs to do when new "input_device" appears is to
> load one or more input handler modules based on device's capability
> bits. The decision whether a device is "good enough" to create a
> device node should be done by hotplug handler for the other "input"
> class.
>
Yes, topology is not an issue when loading modules.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke hare@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG S390 & zSeries
Maxfeldstraße 5 +49 911 74053 688
90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-01-19 14:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-01-18 14:59 [PATCH 2/2] Remove input_call_hotplug Hannes Reinecke
2005-01-18 15:56 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-01-19 9:59 ` Hannes Reinecke
2005-01-19 14:05 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-01-19 14:16 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2005-01-19 14:44 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2005-01-19 14:56 ` Hannes Reinecke
2005-01-19 15:49 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2005-01-19 15:50 ` Hannes Reinecke
2005-01-19 16:53 ` Vojtech Pavlik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=41EE6BA8.6020705@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=dtor_core@ameritech.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vojtech@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).