[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 1 of 4] Configfs is really sysfs
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 08:54:39AM +1000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> But it would be stupid to forbid users from creating directories in sysfs or
> to forbid kernel modules from directly tweaking a configfs namespace. Why
> should the kernel not be able to add objects to a directory a user created?
> It should be up to the module author to decide these things.

This is precisely why configfs is separate from sysfs. If both
user and kernel can create objects, the lifetime of the object and its
filesystem representation is very complex. Sysfs already has problems
with people getting this wrong. configfs does not.
The fact that sysfs and configfs have similar backing stores
does not make them the same thing.



"Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain."
- Freidrich von Schiller
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-31 01:15    [W:0.051 / U:6.408 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site