On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:46:03PM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:37:03PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 07:23:41AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > > If the count of values handled in a transaction is not to high and it
> > > makes sense to group these values logically, why not just create an
> > > attribute group for every transaction, which creates dummy attributes
> > > to fill the values in, and use an "action" file in that group, that
> > > commits all the values at once to whatever target? That should fit into
> > > the ioctl use pattern, right?
> >
> > That's what configfs can handle easier. I think the issue is getting
> > stuff from the kernel in one atomic snapshot (all the different file
> > values from the same point in time.)
>
> Sure, but just like an ioctl, the kernel could return the values after
> writing to the "action" file in the dummy attributes. That would be
> something like a snapshot, right?
Yes, but where would the buffer be to return the data to on a write? In
the data that the user passed to write?
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]
