On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:28:41AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > On 12/12/2014 05:52 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 04:48:20PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > > I don't know about anyone else but I'm having a hard time reading the > > restrack name, it looks like a misspelling of restack to me. > Any alternative names? Well, even just res_track would help. > I will move the code for provider matching to frameworks, > so it will be easy to add just dev_info after every failed attempt > of getting resource, including deferring. This is the simplest solution > and it should be similar in verbosity to deferred probing. > Maybe other solution is to provide debug_fs (or device) attribute showing > restrack status per device. I think both are useful - it's often helpful to have a listing of what resources have actually been registered, for example to help spot typos.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
