From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dimitris Michailidis Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] cxgb4: Add main driver file and driver Makefile Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:34:31 -0700 Message-ID: <4BB3F827.3010402@chelsio.com> References: <20100330141904.5236fe44@nehalam> <20100330.225042.107712654.davem@davemloft.net> <4BB3E689.4050001@chelsio.com> <20100331.172401.00333850.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shemminger@vyatta.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from stargate.chelsio.com ([67.207.112.58]:10324 "EHLO stargate.chelsio.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758559Ab0DABei (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:34:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100331.172401.00333850.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller wrote: >> So, I propose getting rid of 3-4 of these files that are of lesser >> value and moving the rest to debugfs for now. If some alternative >> through ethtool or something becomes available I can get rid of >> anything that can be handled through a more general facility. Would >> that be acceptable? > > You can use sysfs. sysfs is a possibility but I thought Stephen's initial concern was that I was adding too many of these proc files and that they were creating a potential API. sysfs will result in a lot more files with its value-per-file model and I think sysfs and proc are similar in "APIness". So it's not clear to me how going to sysfs would address Stephen's point. The remove-a-few plus move-to-debugfs proposal was in order to end up with fewer files in a non-API filesystem. As these builtin switches become more common I expect an official way to represent and access them will emerge but maybe it's not a good idea to introduce a sysfs model for them as part of this driver submission.