Messages in this thread | | | From | Dmitry Torokhov <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] [PATCH] driver core: allow userspace to unbind drivers from devices. | Date | Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:07:14 -0500 |
| |
On Tuesday 16 November 2004 03:17 pm, Greg KH wrote: > > 2.) I don't like having an "unbind" file. > > Why?
I do not like interfaces accepting and encouraging writing garbage data. What value sould be written into "unbind"? Yes, any junk.
> > > This implies that we will have at least three seperate files controlling > > driver binding when we really need only one or two at the most. Consider > > "bind", "unbind", and the link to the driver that is bound. > > No. Consider the fact that the "unbind" file will not be present if the > device is not bound to anything. Once it is bound, the unbind file will > be created, and the symlink will be created. The symlink matches other > parts of sysfs. By trying to put the name of the driver in a file, that > makes userspace work a lot harder to try to figure out exactly what > driver is bound (consider the fact that I can have both a pci and a usb > driver with the same name in sysfs, and that's legal.)
But not 2 drivers with the same name on the same bus so I don't think this is a valid argument. Anyway, we already have this symlink.
> > So, when a device is not bound to a driver, there will be no symlink, or > a "unbind" file, only a "bind" file. Really there is only 1 "control" > type file present at any single point in time.
Does that imply that I can not rebind device while it is bound to a driver? ("bind" would be missing it seems). And what about all other flavors of that operation - rescan, reconnect? Do we want to have separate attributes for them as well?
-- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |