On Sunday 27 May 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> f5f72b46c349fefcfd4421b2213c6ffb324c5e56 appears to break the userspace
> interface to the CMOS alarm. This could previously be accessed via
> /proc/acpi/alarm ...
I was a bit surprised the ACPI team didn't have more comments on
that issue, myself. Thing is, all of /proc/acpi/* is deprecated
(scheduled for removal in barely over one month!) and nobody had
found any actual users of that "alarm" file when they searched for
them a while ago. I suppose the conclusion then was that there
are no applications using it.
> I'm not actually sure why this is the case. It doesn't look like the two
> interfaces are fundamentally incompatible.
ISTR the issue is that ACPI only allows one chunk of code to hook
into the relevant notifications. So: either /proc/acpi/wakeup;
or /sys/class/rtc/rtc0/wakealarm; but not both.
> I agree that removing the
> proc code is a good long-term aim, but it'd be nice to be able to test
> the new RTC code without removing existing functionality.
Coexistence is unfortunately problematic here. And with "long term"
documented to be a bit over a month ... I guess all I can say is
that if you can come up with a good patch to make both available,
please do so.
- Dave
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
