Re: [PATCH 10 of 12] Fix Tpm driver -- sysfs owernship changes

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 03:40:16PM -0500, Kylene Hall wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 05:19:03PM -0500, Kylene Hall wrote:
> > > -	device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_pubek);
> > > -	device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_pcrs);
> > > -	device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_caps);
> > > +	for (i = 0; i < TPM_NUM_ATTR; i++)
> > > +		device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &chip->vendor->attr[i]);
> > 
> > Use an attribute group, instead of this.  That will allow you to get
> > rid of the TPM_NUM_ATTR value, and this looney macro:
> > 
> > > +#define TPM_DEVICE_ATTRS { \
> > > +        __ATTR(pubek, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_pubek, NULL), \
> > > +        __ATTR(pcrs, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_pcrs, NULL), \
> > > +        __ATTR(caps, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_caps, NULL), \
> > > +        __ATTR(cancel, S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP, NULL, tpm_store_cancel) }
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> > 
> > 
> 
> Ok, the patch below has the same functionality as the previous patch but 
> gets rid of the macro and implements an attribute_group.  Is there any way 
> to avoid the repeated code in every tpm_specific file to setup the 
> attribute_group and still ensure the files are owned by the tpm_specific 
> module?  The only thing I can come up with is either not using the 
> TPM_DEVICE macro at all or creating with TPM_DEVICE macro and then 
> changing the owner field.

Why are you trying to split this driver up into such tiny pieces?
What's wrong with one driver for all devices?

thanks,

greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/