On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 02:14:50PM -0600, Andrew Patterson wrote:
> > > Note that a sysfs implementation has problems. Binary attributes are
> > > discouraged/not-allowed.
> >
> > I've never heard that. Is this similar to the argument
> > "The sysfs tree would be too deep?"
>
> >From Documentation/filesystes/sysfs.txt
>
> "Attributes should be ASCII text files, preferably with only one value
> per file. It is noted that it may not be efficient to contain only
> value per file, so it is socially acceptable to express an array of
> values of the same type.
>
> Mixing types, expressing multiple lines of data, and doing fancy
> formatting of data is heavily frowned upon. Doing these things may get
> you publically humiliated and your code rewritten without notice."
>
> My understanding is that sysfs is meant to be human-readable. I do not
> know if this is a hard and fast rule or just a convention. Configfs is
> probably a better fit at least for writeable attributes, but may not be
> cooked yet.
There's precedent for binary data in sysfs -- pci config space is one.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |