On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 12:16:45PM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > The current version does it through a char device, but that requires > creating a simple_fs and anon_inode for teardown on driver removal, plus > a bunch of hooks through the driver that exposes it (NVMe, in this case) > to set this all up. > > Christoph is suggesting a sysfs interface which could potentially avoid > the anon_inode and all of the extra hooks. It has some significant > benefits and maybe some small downsides, but I wouldn't describe it as > horrid. Yeah, I don't think is is horrible, it fits in with the resource files for the BARs, and solves a lot of problems. Greg, can you explain what would be so bad about it?
