linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Drop platform sysfs support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9b2b86520908180143t4b25c1f7hd78cd4b4333c4ab4@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:43:36 +0100
From:	Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@...glemail.com>
To:	Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com>
Cc:	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cezary.jackiewicz@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Drop platform sysfs support

On 8/18/09, Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com> wrote:
> With rfkill support being added, the platform support is no longer
> necessary.  Standard rfkill interfaces can be used to administer the box
> now.
> --
> Mario Limonciello
> *Dell | Linux Engineering*
> mario_limonciello@...l.com
>

-static struct platform_device *compal_device;

I don't think this is the right way to go.  I don't object to removing
the sysfs attributes, but the platform device can still be useful as a
parent device to the rfkill and backlight devices.  (See my earlier
comment on the use of rfkill_allocate()).

In practice I suspect it makes no difference that the rfkill and
backlight devices are exported as virtual devices with no physical
parent.  I just don't think it's "right" :-).

Thanks
Alan
--
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/