On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:13:57AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Rafael J. Wysocki (2019-07-31 04:58:36) > > On Wednesday, July 31, 2019 10:34:11 AM CEST Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 1:41 AM Stephen Boyd <swb...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > We can run into the same problem when two buses name their devices the > > > > same name and then we attempt to attach a wakeup source to those two > > > > devices. Or we can have a problem where a virtual wakeup is made with > > > > the same name, and again we'll try to make a duplicate named device. > > > > Using something like 'event' or 'wakeup' or 'ws' as the prefix avoids > > > > this > > > > problem and keeps things clean. > > > > > > Or suffix, like "<devname-wakeup>. > > > > > > But if prefixes are used by an existing convention, I would prefer > > > "ws-" as it is concise enough and should not be confusing. > > Another possibility is 'eventN', so it reads as /sys/class/wakeup/event0
"eventX" is a prefix already used by the input subsystem, so you might run into conflicts here :( "wakeupX" makes sense, no namespace colisions there at all. thanks, greg k-h
