[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081830520.7686@pentafluge.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 18:32:02 +0000 (GMT)
From: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
To: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Marcin Juszkiewicz <openembedded@....one.pl>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: Git backlight subsystem tree
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 15:28 +0000, James Simmons wrote:
> > I have some patches that move the backlight away from using the class
> > stuff. The only problem is the patch requires all backlight devices
> > to be linked to a real struct device. Right now the acpi backligths are
> > not.
>
> Why would you want to do that?
>
> The whole point of having this is so that backlights appear as a
> standard interface under /sys/class/backlight.
>
> An example of why standardised interfaces are good would be someone
> writing an applet for a handheld to control the backlight brightness.
> With the class in place, the applet can easily work with any backlight.
> Without it, it has to be written for each backlight.
>
> So this is a very strong NAK but I'm curious why you'd want to do it...
I CC Greg to explain. The backlight class didn't go away. The way it is
handled is different.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists