[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: PATCH/RFC: driver model/pmcore wakeup hooks (1/4)

> > > This lets drivers standardize how they present their ability to issue
> > > wakeups, and how they manage whether that ability should be used.
> >
> > Why do you assign "enabled" to variable instead of using it directly?
> So there's exactly one copy of that string in use, agreeing with itself.
> Also, so strncmp() can be used. It won't matter if the sysadmin goes
> echo -n enabled > wakeup
> echo enabled > wakeup

Well, you could make that 0,1. That would be more sysfs-style...

> I'd personally rather use "on" and "off", but there seems to be
> a convention in /proc/acpi/wakeup in favor of polysyllabicism.
> > And perhaps you should print "not supported" instead of empty string...
> Except that's two words, not one, which will make shell script
> bugs happen more readily. I thought about "(none)" which
> has the same issue, and "-". But I figured that if it were very
> important, a good solution would appear ... ;)

On the second thought, perhaps file simply should not be there if
wakeup is not supported.
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.078 / U:11.228 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site