Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763519AbYBFB7W (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:59:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760063AbYBFB7K (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:59:10 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:45006 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758793AbYBFB7I (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:59:08 -0500 From: Len Brown Organization: Intel Open Source Technology Center To: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH for review] ACPI: Create /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/ counters Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 20:58:50 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200802050230.10873.lenb@kernel.org> <200802051812.09228.lenb@kernel.org> <20080205231842.GB8740@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20080205231842.GB8740@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200802052058.50663.lenb@kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1526 Lines: 43 On Tuesday 05 February 2008 18:18, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:12:09PM -0500, Len Brown wrote: > > On Tuesday 05 February 2008 17:18, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:30:10AM -0500, Len Brown wrote: > > > > # cat /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/summary > > > > pm_timer 0 > > > > glbl_lock 0 > > > > power_btn 0 > > > > sleep_btn 0 > > > > rtc 0 > > > > gpe00 0 > > ... > > > > gpe1F 0 > > > > gpe_hi 0 > > > > gpe_total 63 > > > > acpi_irq 63 > > > > > > Eeek! Why? What's wrong with individual files here? > > > > My expectation is that this is a shell interface for debugging, > > not an API for programs. ala /proc/interrupts. > > Great, then use debugfs for it. Please, don't put debug stuff like this > in sysfs, that's not what it is there for. You can do whatever you want > in debugfs :) Can you point to a model of good behaviour that I can copy? note that I want this information to be available on every system, just like /proc/interrupts is. /proc/ has seqfile support, is there a reason I shouldn't use it? I'd banned additional files from /proc/acpi for a long time since the directory layout was ill-conceived. But maybe I should re-consider the headlong rush to use sysfs? thanks, -Len -- 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/