Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:38:32 +0000 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 02/15] drivers/base: add restrack framework |
| |
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:28:41AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > On 12/12/2014 05:52 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 04:48:20PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> > I don't know about anyone else but I'm having a hard time reading the > > restrack name, it looks like a misspelling of restack to me.
> Any alternative names?
Well, even just res_track would help.
> I will move the code for provider matching to frameworks, > so it will be easy to add just dev_info after every failed attempt > of getting resource, including deferring. This is the simplest solution > and it should be similar in verbosity to deferred probing.
> Maybe other solution is to provide debug_fs (or device) attribute showing > restrack status per device.
I think both are useful - it's often helpful to have a listing of what resources have actually been registered, for example to help spot typos. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |