On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 2:44 PM Martin Kurbanov <MMKurbanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21.11.2022 15:38, Martin Kurbanov wrote: > In the previous patch series feedback you mentioned two main problems: > sysfs node creation time and life cycle, and sysfs node creation method. > Let me explain why I didn't fix the above items. > > 1) About sysfs node creation time and its life cycle. In my opinion, > sysfs node should exist only when user has activated pattern explicitly; > otherwise, it will mislead potential user in the case when pattern is > not activated, but sysfs node existed. OK. > 2) About pattern_trig_attrs. We need to use sysfs_notify_dirent() > instead of sysfs_notify(), cause sysfs_notify() can sleep on the lock, > but it's not acceptable for the pattern code in the timer context. > Considering this, we have to create sysfs node in the > pattern_trig_activate() directly and retrieve kernfs_node for required > sysfs_notify_dirent() routine. Is there a guarantee that nobody is using the removed node? If no, what would be the problems with that if any? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
