Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752363AbXBHSAV (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:00:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752370AbXBHSAV (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:00:21 -0500 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([194.106.48.114]:57966 "EHLO tim.rpsys.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752363AbXBHSAU (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:00:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Git backlight subsystem tree From: Richard Purdie To: James Simmons Cc: LKML , akpm , Marcin Juszkiewicz In-Reply-To: References: <1170901826.5859.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:59:55 +0000 Message-Id: <1170957595.5849.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1019 Lines: 26 On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 15:28 +0000, James Simmons wrote: > I have some patches that move the backlight away from using the class > stuff. The only problem is the patch requires all backlight devices > to be linked to a real struct device. Right now the acpi backligths are > not. Why would you want to do that? The whole point of having this is so that backlights appear as a standard interface under /sys/class/backlight. An example of why standardised interfaces are good would be someone writing an applet for a handheld to control the backlight brightness. With the class in place, the applet can easily work with any backlight. Without it, it has to be written for each backlight. So this is a very strong NAK but I'm curious why you'd want to do it... Richard - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/