[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1208689966.9212.428.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:12:46 +0100
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: kay.sievers@...y.org, md@...ux.it, harald@...hat.com,
linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Expose netdevice dev_id through sysfs
On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 03:55 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:50:44 +0100
>
> > Certainly, it's possible that we'll need _more_ criteria for udev to
> > match on; that doesn't necessarily mean that dev_id shouldn't be one of
> > them, does it?
>
> I've read what you have to say, and your point is logical.
>
> However you've just also stated that dev_id isn't even needed to solve
> the particular problems you're interested in.
This is true (assuming udev gets fixed).
> I'm not against exporting the value. But let's do it because it does
> solve a problem, not because it's fun to export every object instance
> variable via sysfs :-)
The reason I still submitted it, after realising that Marco's objections
to letting udev rely on the 'KERNEL==' match were bogus, is because I
think it does still help on S390 -- it lets us remove the special case
hack there.
I don't think it's actually _broken_ on S390 at the moment; just a bit
icky. That was sufficient motivation to still submit the patch :)
--
dwmw2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists