Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:34:34 +0200 | From | Vojtech Pavlik <> | Subject | Re: [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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |