Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 2 Apr 2007 12:33:11 -0700 (PDT) | From | Luben Tuikov <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |