From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750772AbVHRFlq (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 01:41:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750764AbVHRFlp (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 01:41:45 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:7403 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750757AbVHRFlm (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 01:41:42 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 22:23:11 -0700 From: Greg KH To: James Bottomley Cc: Matthew Wilcox , James.Smart@Emulex.Com, Andrew Morton , SCSI Mailing List , Linux Kernel , Alan Cox , Russell King Subject: Re: [PATCH] add transport class symlink to device object Message-ID: <20050818052311.GD29301@kroah.com> References: <9BB4DECD4CFE6D43AA8EA8D768ED51C201AD35@xbl3.ma.emulex.com> <20050813213955.GB19235@kroah.com> <20050814150231.GA9466@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <1124145677.5089.68.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1124145677.5089.68.camel@mulgrave> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:41:17PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 16:02 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > /sys/class/tty/ttyS0/device -> ../../../devices/parisc/0/0:0/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0 > > /sys/class/tty/ttyS1/device -> ../../../devices/parisc/0/0:0/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0 > > /sys/class/tty/ttyS2/device -> ../../../devices/parisc/0/0:0/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0 > > /sys/class/tty/ttyS3/device -> ../../../devices/parisc/0/0:0/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0 > > /sys/class/tty/ttyS4/device -> ../../../devices/parisc/0/0:0/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0 > > Actually, isn't the fix to all of this to combine Greg and James' > patches? Yes it is. > The Greg one fails in SCSI because we don't have unique class device > names (by convention we use the same name as the device bus_id) and > James' one fails for ttys because the class name isn't unique. However, > if the link were derived from something like > > : > > Then is would be unique in both cases. I agree. > Unless anyone can think of any more failing cases? I'll try this out and see if anything breaks :) thanks, greg k-h