[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5.31 driverfs: patch for your consideration
    On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 10:32:30PM +0000, Adam Belay wrote:
    > Also after looking at the interface code I realized that not just my
    > code used sprintf. Do you think they should all use snprintf instead
    > or is the probability of a driver attribute exceeding the one page
    > buffer size so low that it doesn't matter?

    snprintf is always a good idea to be using.

    > Also I was wondering if you think resource management variables (irq,
    > io, dma, etc) should live in the device structure like power management
    > variables do?

    Lots of different devices do not have irq, io, and dma assigned to them
    (like every USB device). These values should be on a per-bus type (i.e.
    most pci devices _do_ have those types of values.

    > Global resource management seams interesting to me, although there
    > already is a proc interface that does list resources, I'm wondering if
    > the driver model is a good place to put such an interface?

    Yes it is a good place to put them, as almost every /proc file that does
    not deal with processes will eventually be moving to this fs.


    greg k-h
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.022 / U:9.688 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site