Re: [PATCH 8/19]: SCST SYSFS interface implementation

[Vladislav Bolkhovitin]

Boaz Harrosh, on 11/15/2010 08:19 PM wrote:
> On 11/15/2010 06:16 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:46:38AM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>>> All these issues we were discussing are interesting and are real Kernel
>>> problems. For instance the last comment you made was that for such a dynamic
>>> system and life time problems, and functionality. A better and expected
>>> solution might be the device tree and not sysfs.
>>
>> Yes, that is what I have been saying for a while now.
>>
>> Again:
>> 	This code is using kobjects incorrectly.
>> 	This code should not be using kobjects.
>>
>> this is my last response to this thread now, and I'm sure you can
>> understand why.
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> greg k-h
> 
> Thank you Greg for your time and most valuable input.
> I'm sorry for not understanding your position. I needed the
> clear cut statement:
> 
> 	This code should not be using kobjects. i.e not belong in sysfs
> 
> SCST guys. This sounds pretty clear cut to me. Sysfs was not built
> in mind for such dynamic systems, and it will cause never ending
> conflicts with future maintenance of sysfs vs SCST.

As I explained in the previous e-mail, I believe, SYSFS perfectly suits
SCST and SCST perfectly suits SYSFS.

If you think it isn't so, let's discuss each showstopper for that, one
after one.

> Lets call it Linux-Target and unify all our efforts.

Looks like a great idea!

Thanks,
Vlad
--
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/