[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:0.038 / U:1.540 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site