On 25-Feb-00 Julian Coleman wrote:
> Yes, I was thinking about this today.  It seems sensible to have an open
> on the serial ports power them on and a (last) close power them off.  Because
> the various devices are driven off both aux1 and aux2, does it make sense
> for a single device to control this, and preferably all the power related
> functions too?  I think I'd prefer that to having to open/ioctl/close many
> devices (and the aux registers don't have /dev entries at the moment).  Add
> this to the tctrl device?

No no no.. I mean have only functions that can be called from inside the kernel
in the aux drivers.  That way the devices themselves (and the tctrlctl driver
eventually from apm) can shut the power off.  The serial code could be ifdef
tadpole'd to do the power on/off stuff inside the open/close routines.

For battery use it would be much better to do it like this.. so they are only
on when actually in use.

If anything the apm interface in tctrlctl should power them off on the SLEEP
command.  but I could also make tadpolectl allow manual twiddling of them.

Having a /dev/aux would be nasty.. ;)

---
Tim Rightnour <root@garbled.net>
NetBSD: Free multi-architecture OS http://www.netbsd.org/
NetBSD Mailing lists on the web: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/