[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0707101042030.2595-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:42:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
cc: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Sysfs and suicidal attributes
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>> A general immediate disconnect of the buffers (which will be handled in
> >>> a second pass) would be great, but doesn't sound easy.
> >> I haven't thought too hard about actual implementation but it's pretty
> >> specific case. If doing things in generic manner is difficult, there
> >> are plenty of shortcuts to choose from, I think.
> >
> > The "second pass" approach where the store method calls the sysfs core
> > or sets a flag or whatever sounds doable, but I'm not sure how general
> > we can get. Maybe for all store methods that just trigger an action.
>
> Hmm... I'll give it a shot in a few days.
How would that differ from the callback technique we use now?
Alan Stern
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists