Re: [PATCH 2.6.10-rc1 0/4] driver-model: manual device attach

[Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:32:37 +0900, Tejun Heo <tj@home-tj.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 12:02:57AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> 
> > Do we really need 2 or even 3 files ("attach", "detach" and "rescan")?
> > Given that you really can't (at least not yet) do all there operations
> > for all buses from the core that woudl require 3 per-bus callbacks.
> > I think reserving special values such as "none" or "detach" and "rescan"
> > shoudl work just fine and also willallow extending supported operations
> > on per-bus basis. For example serio bus supports "reconnect" option which
> > tries to re-initialize device if something happened to it. It does not
> > want to do rescan as that would generate new input devices while it is
> > much more convenient to re-use old ones.
> 
> How about making the command format "CMD ARGS" rather than
> "{CMD|DRIVERNAME}"  i.e.
> 
> not
> 
> # echo e100 > drvctl
> # echo detach > drvctl
> 
> but
> 
> # echo attach e100 > drvctl
> # echo detach > drvctl
> 
> But, I don't know.  It now just seems too much like a proc node.
>

Well, I was lazy and did not want to do any parsing at all, but I do
not have anything against "CMD ARG ARG ARG" form, especially
if integrate drvparm. 

-- 
Dmitry