ibm-acpi-devel

[ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Henrique de M. H. <hm...@hm...>]

Len has asked again about when ibm-acpi would move to drivers/misc, so I am
preparing a patch to do just that.  This means it will move in 2.6.22.

It is time to seriously consider renaming the driver, and also whether the
driver should be broken in various modules or not.  It would be nice to have
ALSA stuff in a separate module, for example.

For the name, I think I favour "tp_*", so we'd have tp_acpi (most of what is
ibm-acpi today), etc.  It is not as descriptive as I'd like, but thinkpad_*
is already taken by out-of-tree stuff.

If anyone has anything to say about these topics, it is time to make your
voice heard.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Shem M. <mul...@gm...>]

On 3/13/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> It would be nice to have
> ALSA stuff in a separate module, for example.

Some distributions have modprobe-based mechanisms for loading ALSA
drivers. They might react unfavorably to ALSA drivers loaded by other
means.


> For the name, I think I favour "tp_*", so we'd have tp_acpi (most of what is
> ibm-acpi today), etc.  It is not as descriptive as I'd like, but thinkpad_*
> is already taken by out-of-tree stuff.

I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
any concrete collision?

FWIW, I'm awaiting an opportunity to rename tp_smapi to
thinkpad_smapi; and thinkpad_ec is already OK.

  Shem

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Alex D. <ale...@gm...>]

On 3/13/07, Shem Multinymous <mul...@gm...> wrote:
> On 3/13/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> > It would be nice to have
> > ALSA stuff in a separate module, for example.
>
> Some distributions have modprobe-based mechanisms for loading ALSA
> drivers. They might react unfavorably to ALSA drivers loaded by other
> means.
>
>
> > For the name, I think I favour "tp_*", so we'd have tp_acpi (most of what is
> > ibm-acpi today), etc.  It is not as descriptive as I'd like, but thinkpad_*
> > is already taken by out-of-tree stuff.
>
> I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
> any concrete collision?

I prefer thinkpad_* as well.

Alex

>
> FWIW, I'm awaiting an opportunity to rename tp_smapi to
> thinkpad_smapi; and thinkpad_ec is already OK.
>
>   Shem

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Henrique de M. H. <hm...@hm...>]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
> > any concrete collision?
> 
> I prefer thinkpad_* as well.

Ok, what about thinkpad-laptop/thinkpad_laptop ?

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Alex D. <ale...@gm...>]

On 3/13/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > > I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
> > > any concrete collision?
> >
> > I prefer thinkpad_* as well.
>
> Ok, what about thinkpad-laptop/thinkpad_laptop ?
>

seems a bit redundant, but still better than tp.

Alex

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Henrique de M. H. <hm...@hm...>]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On 3/13/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > > > I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
> > > > any concrete collision?
> > >
> > > I prefer thinkpad_* as well.
> >
> > Ok, what about thinkpad-laptop/thinkpad_laptop ?
> 
> seems a bit redundant, but still better than tp.

It is, as thinkpad implies laptop.

We will probably also have snd_thinkpad, for the ALSA module (if I make it
into its own module, which is probably a very good idea).

I'd jump in and get thinkpad_acpi for most of the stuff in ibm-acpi, but the
problem is that there used to exist an thinkpad-acpi module, by Erik
Rigtorp.  It never made it to mainline (I just checked, it is not in 2.6.9,
and ibm-acpi was added in 2.6.10 and completely superseeded Erik's module
which only did hotkeys).

I guess I can retake the name without too much problems after so long and
since it never made it to mainline AND it was not widely used, but still...

What do you guys think?

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Re: [ibm-acpi-devel] ibm-acpi moving to drivers/misc

[Alex D. <ale...@gm...>]

On 3/14/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > On 3/13/07, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hm...@hm...> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > > > > I vote for "thinkpad_*", since "tp_" seems too ambiguous. Iis there
> > > > > any concrete collision?
> > > >
> > > > I prefer thinkpad_* as well.
> > >
> > > Ok, what about thinkpad-laptop/thinkpad_laptop ?
> >
> > seems a bit redundant, but still better than tp.
>
> It is, as thinkpad implies laptop.
>
> We will probably also have snd_thinkpad, for the ALSA module (if I make it
> into its own module, which is probably a very good idea).
>
> I'd jump in and get thinkpad_acpi for most of the stuff in ibm-acpi, but the
> problem is that there used to exist an thinkpad-acpi module, by Erik
> Rigtorp.  It never made it to mainline (I just checked, it is not in 2.6.9,
> and ibm-acpi was added in 2.6.10 and completely superseeded Erik's module
> which only did hotkeys).
>
> I guess I can retake the name without too much problems after so long and
> since it never made it to mainline AND it was not widely used, but still...
>
> What do you guys think?
>

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Alex