From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756210AbZBTP25 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:28:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753141AbZBTP2o (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:28:44 -0500 Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174]:39856 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753073AbZBTP2n (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:28:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20090218151132.476.81706.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20090218183945.GA31797@suse.de> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:28:42 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Export device_add_attributes() so drivers can use it. From: Grant Likely To: Kay Sievers Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Kay, Thanks for the reply, it clarifies a lot. It sounds like this really should be documented (in Documentation/driver-model/device.txt?). I'm happy to add a blurb to that effect and send a patch, but I want to make sure I really understand the model before I do so. I've got a couple more questions below: On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: [...] > If an attribute is not available at event time, nothing of this can > ever work. If you look a the device a second later, you will see the > proper looking files and values, and all the test programs will work, > but it will always fail at device creation. [...] > That all might not be needed for your specific setup/driver/device and > may work fine for your need. But we don't want to encourage anybody > with another new API which creates the usual trouble we need to fix > later. Fair enough > And we need to fix things like this all the time. Can you point me at a 'textbook' example of one of these fixups? > Also the existing sysfs attribute groups API has the same problem if > the group is created later, but as far as I can see it should work > fine for your purpose. So it's better using that, instead of exporting > another different API. Okay, I this option looks pretty straight forward too. Thanks, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.