Re: [RFC PATCHES] Re: Is configfs the right solution forconfiguration based fs?

[Ben Nizette]

On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 14:37 -0700, Joel Becker wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 07:22:56PM +1000, Ben Nizette wrote:
> > A version of my gpio-dev interface is attached.  Bear in mind it was
> > never completed, it's full of known bugs but hey, might be useful for
> > you anyway :-)
> 
> 	Looks good.  Fits about what I would expect a configfs interface
> to look like, with simple show/store stuff.  I can see where some macros
> would have shortened some bolierplate.
> 	Was there any other boilerplate you found cumbersome?  I mean
> outside of defining attribute structs and the show/store_attr()
> trampoline functions?  Let me know, so I can incorporate it.
> 

You know, I think you've about covered the boilerplate work.  Apart from
that, well it took me a millisecond to work out what the point of
config_{group,item}s was; I went in kinda expecting to see one struct
for directories and one for attributes.  In fact I still not sure I can
explain the need for config_items separate from config_groups.  Little
help?  :-)

	--Ben.

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