On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 08:59:32PM -0400, Yani Ioannou wrote:
> On further reflection, how about I work off this patch for now and for
> each of the derived attributes submit a separate patch implementing
> the callbacks, etc for that attribute along with an example patch
> showing how it can be used to benefit some existing code (these
> already exist for device and class attributes, so I'll resubmit those
> examples).
>
> This way we can be sure that we aren't changing any of the derived
> attributes needlessly, and it presents a better view of exactly what
> changes I'm making to others I suppose :-).
That sounds great, and is what I was trying to get at.
> We should probably document this change somehow in the sysfs
> documentation at some point too.
Yeah, documentation, what a concept... :)
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
