On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 11:30 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 07:20:33PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > At git://git.infradead.org/battery-2.6.git there is an initial > > implementation of a battery class, along with a driver which makes use > > of it. The patch is below, and also viewable at > > http://git.infradead.org/?p=battery-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=master;hp=linus > > > > I don't like the sysfs interaction much -- is it really necessary for me > > to provide a separate function for each attribute, rather than a single > > function which handles them all and is given the individual attribute as > > an argument? That seems strange and bloated. > > It is, but no one has asked for it to be changed to be like the struct > device attributes are. In fact, why not just use the struct device > attributes here instead? That will be much easier and keep me from > having to convert your code over to use it in the future :)
Heh, OK. I'll look at that. Thanks. > > I'm half tempted to ditch the sysfs attributes and just use a single > > seq_file, in fact. > > Ick, no. You should use the hwmon interface, and standardize on a > proper battery api just like those developers have standardized on other > sensor apis that are exported to userspace. Er, yes. The whole point in this is so we can standardise on a proper battery API. I'm only really supposed to be adding support for the battery on the $100 laptop, but I just couldn't bring myself to do yet another different battery driver without trying to bring in some sanity. I sincerely hope that those responsible for the various other different userspace interfaces for PMU, ACPI, etc. are all hanging their heads in shame at this point :) -- dwmw2 _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
