linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Optional Beeping During Resume From Suspend To Ram.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070704232513.GA2695@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 5 Jul 2007 01:25:13 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>
Cc:	nigel@...pend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optional Beeping During Resume From Suspend To Ram.


> > > > > Beep_flags should be removed too if you're sticking with /proc.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixed.
> > > 
> > > Ta.  But you didn't answer the question - why /proc and not sysfs?
> > 
> > Do you seriously advocate setting two bits of one variable from /proc,
> > and one more bit from /sys?
> 
> That's partly why I had a separate variable - retaining proc only because it's 
> existing functionality, using sysfs for the new code. Remember, too, that 

/proc is not deprecated _that_ much, and notice that this is sysctl,
not regular procfs code.

Yes, I see why you did it that way, but I also think you overdisgned
it a bit. 
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/