[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070705223716.GG3881@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 00:37:16 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>, nigel@...pend2.net,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optional Beeping During Resume From Suspend To Ram.
On Thu 2007-07-05 20:43:44, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, 5 July 2007 01:25, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > Beep_flags should be removed too if you're sticking with /proc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ta. But you didn't answer the question - why /proc and not sysfs?
> > > >
> > > > Do you seriously advocate setting two bits of one variable from /proc,
> > > > and one more bit from /sys?
> > >
> > > That's partly why I had a separate variable - retaining proc only because it's
> > > existing functionality, using sysfs for the new code. Remember, too, that
> >
> > /proc is not deprecated _that_ much, and notice that this is sysctl,
> > not regular procfs code.
> >
> > Yes, I see why you did it that way, but I also think you overdisgned
> > it a bit.
>
> Hmm, what about adding a second interface to acpi_realmode_flags in sysfs, in
> a separate patch, and scheduling the old one, in /proc, for removal?
Well.. it is sysctl... so we already have separate interface,
sysctl(). Yes, sysctl will probably move to /sys one day, but that is
probably bigger project than just suspend.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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