On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 15:13 -0700, Joel Becker wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:06:29PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > Hi Joel, > > > > What do you think..? > > > > Also, here is the drivers/lio-core/iscsi_target_configfs.c commit to > > convert to use to new parameters for CONFIGFS_ATTR_STRUCT() and > > CONFIGFS_ATTR_OPS(): > > It seems even more complex, and inconsistent with what sysfs > and other users do. Can you give me an example of using it? > Sure, my reasoning was as I was looking at converting as much code as possible in target_core_config.c and iscsi_target_configfs.c to use the include/linux/config.h wrappers, I have noticed I am running into a limitiation with existing code: Having the user's attribute set of macro's '_name' being synonymous with both the user's struct _item * and show()/store() defines with CONFIGFS_ATTR_OPS() was going to cause namespace pollution when you want to be able generic show()/store() on multiple struct config_groups hanging off the same original struct _item. For me, this was looking like problems when you have multiple default struct config_groups off a single struct config_group, namely /sys/kernel/config/target/iscsi/$IQN/$TPGT amoung other places in LIO-Target. Also, I would argue the patch makes the existing attribute macro in configfs.h slightly *LESS* complex for the users of the macro because you no longer have to define your own internal "to_<name>()" for each struct config_group you want to hang attributes off. Thanks! --nab > Joel > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
