[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1288888656.2072.5.camel@noppispoppis.nmp.nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 18:37:36 +0200
From: Onkalo Samu <samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com>
To: ext Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc: "hmh@....eng.br" <hmh@....eng.br>,
"alan@...ux.intel.com" <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: device-core: sysfs open close notify
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 17:03 +0100, ext Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 02:32:15PM +0100, samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com wrote:
> > It is easy to get rid of if the mode parameter is used to pass the information
> > that this entry uses open_close_notify. What do you think, is it ok to use
> > mode also to that purpose?
>
> Don't try to overload a parameter that has been used for the past 40+
> years in one way, to try to add additional side-band data that has
> nothing to do with it.
>
> That way lies madness.
>
And that is why I didn't even tried to do that in the first place - even
if it would have been the simple way.
Is the implementation ok otherwise?
I'll add sysfs_create_file_notify which sets the control bit save way.
I think it is enough if these entries can be done attribute by
attribute. It is still possible delete them using normal sysfs
operations.
Thanks for the comments,
Samu
--
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