lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFD driver-core] Lifetime problems of the current driver model
--- James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com> wrote:

> I'd favour trying to separate kobject and struct device for this ...
> move all the sysfs stuff into kobject and device only stuff into struct
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Currently the kobject implementation is pure and well-defined. It is
a good implementation [kobject], and I'd hate to see it lost into being
convoluted with/into another model.

Currently the infrastructure layers are well defined:
kobject -> (A layer with objects, their behavor and implementation)
device -> (--"--)
sysfs. (--"--)
This isn't that bad of an infrastructure.

It is this well defined layering, i.e. objects, their behavior and
implementation, that allows different (better/worse) infrastructures
to be built on top of it.

It is this well-defined layering which will allow what Tejun wants
to be implemented.

> device ... but that would get us into disentangling the ksets, which, on
> balance, isn't going to be fun ...

Luben

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-04-02 21:35    [W:0.762 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site