[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPXgP130hg8uwdmSKAAAKZzxncT-VXYYXvmN-ta7wcXQXgXEmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:12:39 +0200
From: Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] drivers: base: add new class "cpu" to group cpu devices
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
> On 21/08/14 12:20, David Herrmann wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>>>
>>> This patch creates a new class called "cpu" and assigns it to all the
>>> cpu devices. This helps in grouping all the cpu devices and associated
>>> child devices under the same class.
>>>
>>> This patch also:
>>> 1. modifies the get_parent_device to return the legacy path
>>> (/sys/devices/system/cpu/..) for the cpu class devices to support
>>> existing sysfs ABI
>>> 2. avoids creating link in the class directory pointing to the device as
>>> there would be per-cpu instance of these devices with the same name
>>> 3. makes sure subsystem symlink continues pointing to cpu bus instead of
>>> cpu class for cpu devices
>>
>>
>> This patch lacks any explanation _why_ you add a class for CPUs. With
>> this patch applied, these directories are effectively the same:
>> /sys/bus/cpu/devices/
>> /sys/class/cpu/
>>
>
> Yes that's the intention, so that we don't break any existing sysfs/ABI
>
>
>> Why do we need a cpu-class if the same set of information is already
>> available on the cpu-bus? Furthermore, classes are deprecated anyway.
>> Everything you can do with a class can be solved with a bus. And we
>> already have a bus for cpus.
>>
>
> This was suggested[1] by GregKH. The main reason it was added is to
> reuse the device attributes rather than creating the raw kobjects.
>
> It helps to move few other cpu related subsystems using raw kobjects to
> the device attribute groups.
No, nothing should ever create a bus and a class with the same name.
This is not supported by userspace tools.
Your problem needs to be addressed by adding things to the existing
"cpu" bus, not by adding a new class.
Kay
--
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