[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 0/8] Nesting class_device patches that actually work
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 03:18:22AM -0400, Adam Belay wrote:

> As stated above, the keyboard actually does have a real location to hang off of.
> Nonetheless, a keyboard controller is a physical device. It's very different
> from a "virtual device" like a tty. Therefore, it seems unreasonable to make
> virtual devices belong to the "platform" bus.
> If a device doesn't have a parent device, it belongs at the root of the tree.
> That's the only obvious way to represent such a lack of dependency. This
> applies to both class and physical devices.

Well, a VT is obviously a child of the graphics card and of the
keyboard. Similarly for the 'mice' device, which is a child of all input
devices that offer mouseying capabilities.

It's just impossible to express in a tree.

Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs, SuSE CR
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: 2005-10-18 10:36    [W:0.082 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site