[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Scst-devel] [PATCH 8/19]: SCST SYSFS interface implementation
I'm just an outsider - but maybe my perspective has value - it seems there are two sides to this debate:

1) sysfs is great for scst due to certain stability concerns and code concerns
2) sysfs is bad for scst due to the intended role of sysfs and its namespace

Maybe I misunderstand -
But if both sides have merit then wouldn't a compromise be appropriate?

Maybe the sensical compromise is to use sysfs code to create a new namespace that would fit this purpose? It seems that I am also hearing that the alternatives to sysfs aren't always adequate - so why not use sysfs, but have a place where it's appropriate to use it?

Apologies in advance if I'm just way off base here...

- Richard Williams

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-16 13:03    [W:0.198 / U:45.160 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site