On Wed, January 25, 2006 6:23 am, Dmitry Torokhov said: > On Wednesday 25 January 2006 00:09, Brown, Len wrote: [...] > If you remember original code (without registering multiple in-kernel > listeners) I think it was more compact that what is in the kernel > at the moment. Also IIRC current in kernel code may start filling memory > if acpid stops reading events for some reason. > > For the record I think multiple listeners are not needed since the only > possible user is input layer and I firmly believe that ACPI should report > keys/buttons using input layer natively so userspace can get uniform > notification of "Sleep" button being pressed no matter whther that button > is controlled by ACPI or it is just another key on USB keyboard.
I have no problem changing the implementation to avoid useless stuff if the patch is going to be considered for acceptance. >> The other argument against is why enhance an interface when >> perhaps we should instead consider replacing it altogether... The same thing has been said at Dmitry's submission (08/2004) and /proc/acpi/event is still there. :) Also, removing /proc/acpi/event will take a very long time. Anyway what would you suggest (if you have already some plan)? I'd like to try implementing it. -- mattia :wq! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
