On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 09:54:21PM +0000, James Simmons wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 06:32:02PM +0000, James Simmons wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Richard Purdie wrote: > > > > > > > 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... > > > > > > I CC Greg to explain. The backlight class didn't go away. The way it is > > > handled is different. > > > > Have a pointer to the patch so I can help explain better? > > > > As a short summary, 'struct class_device' is going away. Using a > > 'struct device' in its place is what the conversion should have just > > done, no functionality change otherwise. > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/backlight.c > b/drivers/video/backlight/backlight.c
<snip> Looks good to me. And it makes the code simpler too :) thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
