From: John B. <jv...@pr...> - 2002-07-06 04:13:28
|
Hello, I am the maintainer of a Linux driver called "Toshiba Laptop ACPI Extras", which is in the attached patch file. I'm not suggesting that this code be included as part of the ACPI project, but rather am submitting it as an example, with the hope of starting a discussion about how such drivers should be handled. The driver is a high level ACPI driver, along the same lines as "button" or "battery". It allows access to custom methods in the Toshiba ACPI implementation. Without this driver, users of newer Toshiba laptops (such as the Libretto L1, sold in Japan) are not able to, for example, adjust LCD brightness or switch to external video. In other words, the hotkeys on these laptops are not bound in firmware but instead rely on drivers that must access the ACPI. If this becomes a trend, you are likely to see more such drivers in the future. Although in the current implementation my driver sits alongside the general high level drivers, perhaps this is not ideal. I have a proposal for making a clear separation between general and custom drivers: * in the source tree, add a subdirectory to drivers/acpi called "extras". Note that this allows for a separate Makefile and Config.in/help for the custom drivers. * in the kernel configuration, add a sub-category to "ACPI Support" called "Extras". * in the proc namespace, add a subdirectory to acpi called "extras". (Perhaps this isn't necessary?) By doing so, custom ACPI drivers can be maintained independently of the ACPI project. Am I mistaken that this would be desirable? If this sounds acceptable, I would be happy to provide a patch that adds the described skeleton (but no drivers) to the ACPI code. -John Belmonte -- http:// i . / |