Re: [patch 0/8] Nesting class_device patches that actually work

[Vojtech Pavlik]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/