On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:38:57AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:28:15 +0200,
> Kay Sievers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > We could change the driver-core to suppress the creation of an attribute
> > if the attribute's show() or store() method returns something like
> > -ENOENT at registration time?
> > The driver would pass _all_ possible attributes of the device at
> > registration time, but the core would only create the attributes which
> > are implemented for this particular device? Would that work for you?
> >
> > There are already subsystems who need to do similar things internally
> > (firewire), and it may be nice to add such functionality to the core.
>
> This sounds a bit hackish (overloading the meaning of the show() and
> store() methods).
Firewire already does this today, it's actually really nice :)
> > You can assign any number of attribute groups to the device. If they
> > don't have a group name, they will all be created directly at the device
> > level. Would that work for you?
>
> What about generic "conditional attribute groups"? Add a check() method
> which is called just before adding them, and only add them if check()
> returned 0 (or doesn't exist)?
People want this on a per-attribute basis, if you did it on a group
level, we would have a bunch of groups with only one attribute in it,
which would be messy.
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]
