From: Adam Belay <abelay@novell.com>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Patrick Mochel <mochel@digitalimplant.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Some thoughts on device drivers and sysfs
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 17:18:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1111961891.3503.132.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050327214309.GA18745@isilmar.linta.de>
On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 23:43 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 04:27:24PM -0500, Adam Belay wrote:
> > > extern int device_create_file(struct device *device, struct device_attribute
> > > * entry);
> > > and delete them (e.g. in ->remove) using
> > > extern void device_remove_file(struct device * dev, struct device_attribute
> > > * attr);
> > >
> > > and there's also
> > >
> > > extern int driver_create_file(struct device_driver *, struct
> > > driver_attribute *);
> > > extern void driver_remove_file(struct device_driver *, struct
> > > driver_attribute *);
> > >
> > >
> > > Dominik
> >
> > Yes, I'm aware of these functions but they pollute the bus level
> > namespace. I'm interested in reactions to this alternative approach. I
> > wanted to explore the possibility of making a device driver instance a
> > separate component with its own individual state and relationships.
>
> To be honest, I don't consider this to be a pollution of the "bus"
> namespace, but I fear that having two different places for somewhat similar,
> or even equal, data adds unneeded complexity to the driver model. In what
> specific instances has the current design limited or obstructed your
> intentions?
>
Fair enough. I just wanted to float this possibility. I appreciate
your comments. The original intention for this design was to begin
working on a framework for driver layering. (ex. snd-intel8x0m -> ac97,
or the pci express bus abstraction) I was considering the possibility
of having driver devices with parent and child relationships that
reflect the internal layering of Linux drivers. I haven't really had a
chance to fully develop this idea, so at this point, driver layering and
my original email are just abstract concepts.
Adam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-27 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-27 19:24 [RFC] Some thoughts on device drivers and sysfs Adam Belay
2005-03-27 20:53 ` Arioch
2005-03-27 21:08 ` Dominik Brodowski
2005-03-27 21:27 ` Adam Belay
2005-03-27 21:43 ` Dominik Brodowski
2005-03-27 22:18 ` Adam Belay [this message]
2005-03-27 21:25 ` Jon Smirl
2005-03-29 5:03 ` Greg KH
2005-03-29 6:33 ` [linux-pm] " Dmitry Torokhov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1111961891.3503.132.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=abelay@novell.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=mochel@digitalimplant.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox