Re: [patch 08/28] Input: prepare to sysfs integration

On Friday 07 October 2005 01:41, Al Viro wrote:
> ... when the first one to fix should be the lifetime rules.  Both sysfs
> stuff and locking depend on those...

FWIW for me it is easier to think about lifetime rules when I already have
sysfs support. I mean sysfs itself dictates basic lifetime rules, additional
constraints are just that - additional constraints.

-- 
Dmitry
-
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/

---

• References:
  • Re: [patch 08/28] Input: prepare to sysfs integration
    • From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 08/28] Input: prepare to sysfs integration
    • From: Al Viro <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: quick (software versus hardware raid) question (cpu)
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] hfs, hfsplus: don't leak s_fs_info and fix an oops
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 08/28] Input: prepare to sysfs integration
• Next by thread: 2.6.14-rc3-rt9 - a few xruns misses
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]