4 Oct
2013
4 Oct
'13
8:17 p.m.
On Friday, October 04, 2013 10:38:10 AM Jarkko Nikula wrote:
On 10/04/2013 09:55 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
You're misreading my suggestion. What I'm saying is that it seems like it might be useful to have dev_name() return the ACPI name - this would mean that everything, including all the dev_ prints, would use the same name which would then become stable and tied to hardware.
I see. Indeed, this sounds a better idea. At quick look is even more simple.
Well, this is slightly ambiguous. What exactly do you mean by "ACPI names"?
Ah, yes. What I meant as ACPI name was the <bus_id:instance> based ACPI device name/object (or what is the correct terminology), not the hardware ID.
OK
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.