Closed approved.
--Irene
Irene Huang wrote:
> Hi,
> According to the discussion in today's meeting. We are splitting this
> ARC case into two cases.
> The new proposal for this case is attached.
>
> If no objections within 24 hours, I'd like to close the case then.
>
> We'll file another ARC case for the ACPI support with the contract
> signed, when the APIs are available.
>
> Thanks
>
> --Irene
> Henry Zhao wrote:
>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>>
>>>> libsysevent committed
>>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't saying you import libsysevent like saying you use ioctl (i.e.
>>> the interface is a gateway to all sorts of functionality at all sorts
>>> of different stability levels)? Without knowing what events, it's
>>> hard to say if it's a safe usage or not.
>>>
>>> For this case, wouldn't you be importing events from the ACPI system,
>>> which is Project Private (PSARC 2005/085)? Will you need a contract
>>> from the ACPI team promising not to change them incompatibly without
>>> warning you first?
>>>
>>
>> Actually there are two interfaces here:
>>
>> (1) libsysevent There functions are used:
>>
>> sysevent_bind_handle()
>> sysevent_subscribe_event()
>> sysevent_unsubscribe_event()
>> sysevent_unbind_handle()
>>
>> (2) The ACPI events
>>
>> In testing model we use event class EC_ACPIEV
>> (PSARC/2006/601) and subclasses ESC_ACPIEV_VIDEO_SWITCH,
>> ESC_ACPIEV_VIDEO_PROBE. However all of these classes are
>> subject to change. The ACPI team will do a separate ARC case when
>> the project is finalized. We can do a contract, as a consumer, with
>> ACPI team at that time - and this is the second phase of the
>> project.
>>
>>
>
