Am Samstag, 19. Februar 2005 00:34 schrieb Pavel Machek: > Hi! > > > > Well, if you have power button on usb keyboard -- why should it be > > > handled differently from built-in button? > > > > I see no reason. But that tells you that one subsystem should handle > > that, not which subsystem. > > If usb keyboard has power button... I do not think we really want to > route that through acpi. And what if acpi is not available? (APM knows > about suspend key in weird way, but not about power key).
I'd suggest to primarily care about acpi. The other important power management subsystems will follow suit. > > > trip points), and I do not see how you can do interrupts for fan > > > status. Either fans are under Linux control (and kernel could tell you > > > when it turns fan on/off, but...), or they do not exist from Linux's > > > point of few. > > > > They still can have a readable rate, even if not under os control. > > Nevertheless I don't think you can reasonably define what might > > interest user space or not and in which detail. > > Well, we can say that userspace definitely is interested in "power" > key ;-). I wouldn't call that selfevident. The system might be eg. a ticket vending system and we care only about wake ups from touchscreen, trackball and modem and about volume control keys. I don't think you can make up any rules about what user space is interested or not. Regards Oliver - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/