Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:53:52 -0500 | From | Dmitry Torokhov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.10-rc1 0/4] driver-model: manual device attach |
| |
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:32:37 +0900, Tejun Heo <tj@home-tj.org> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 12:02:57AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Do we really need 2 or even 3 files ("attach", "detach" and "rescan")? > > Given that you really can't (at least not yet) do all there operations > > for all buses from the core that woudl require 3 per-bus callbacks. > > I think reserving special values such as "none" or "detach" and "rescan" > > shoudl work just fine and also willallow extending supported operations > > on per-bus basis. For example serio bus supports "reconnect" option which > > tries to re-initialize device if something happened to it. It does not > > want to do rescan as that would generate new input devices while it is > > much more convenient to re-use old ones. > > How about making the command format "CMD ARGS" rather than > "{CMD|DRIVERNAME}" i.e. > > not > > # echo e100 > drvctl > # echo detach > drvctl > > but > > # echo attach e100 > drvctl > # echo detach > drvctl > > But, I don't know. It now just seems too much like a proc node. >
Well, I was lazy and did not want to do any parsing at all, but I do not have anything against "CMD ARG ARG ARG" form, especially if integrate drvparm.
-- 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/
| |