Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] can: Add LIN bus as CAN abstraction

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



...
> ...
> > > > +static int lin_create_sysfs_id_files(struct net_device *ndev)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct lin_device *ldev = netdev_priv(ndev);
> > > > +	struct kobj_attribute *attr;
> > > > +	int ret;
> > > > +
> > > > +	for (int id = 0; id < LIN_NUM_IDS; id++) {
> > > > +		ldev->sysfs_entries[id].ldev = ldev;
> > > > +		attr = &ldev->sysfs_entries[id].attr;
> > > > +		attr->attr.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%02x", id);
> > > > +		if (!attr->attr.name)
> > > > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > > > +		attr->attr.mode = 0644;
> > > > +		attr->show = lin_identifier_show;
> > > > +		attr->store = lin_identifier_store;
> > > > +
> > > > +		sysfs_attr_init(&attr->attr);
> > > > +		ret = sysfs_create_file(ldev->lin_ids_kobj, &attr->attr);
> > > > +		if (ret) {
> > > > +			kfree(attr->attr.name);
> > > > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > > > +		}
> > > > +	}
> > > > +
> > > > +	return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > 
> > > Can you use .dev_groups instead ?
> > 
> > I'm not sure where to attach this in this glue code here. Should I do a
> > class_register() and add the .dev_groups there?
> 
> I guess struct class would be correct direction but I'm not sure if it's 
> viable in this case. It would avoid the need for custom sysfs setup code
> if it's workable.

I just tried to find a way, but these are 64 sysfs files and declaring
them all static looks a bit odd to me. I might be missing something
here.

For v4 I would stick to the dynamic setup and fix the rollback.

Any objections?


Thanks
  -- Christoph





[Index of Archives]     [Automotive Discussions]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [CAN Bus]

  Powered by Linux