On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 10:43:06PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > >No, it does matter. Your suggestion doesn't work, because > >/sys/module/scsi_mod/parameters/ belongs to the module code. To create > >a new attribute there, you use the module_param() code -- and there's > >no way to have code called when your parameter is changed. (thanks, Roland for pointing out that I'm incorrect about code being called) > Ok, thanks for pointing out that /sys/module/scsi_mod/parameters/wait... > is _wrong_. Could you suggest something that would be _right_? No, I can't, which is why I find it hard to like the idea of "use sysfs". I have no particular love for using a module like this, but my preferred way (a new verb for /proc/scsi/scsi) isn't liked by others. So here we stand. > You're almost right here. But IMHO this is simply a case of > doing something in some kernel subsystem in a proper/better > way than it is being done presently. > > Anyway, like I said on another thread, discussions here tend to be > most productive only over code, so I'll try and make a patch to do > this some other way. Come up with a sensible suggestion, and I'll listen to you. Code isn't the issue. API is the issue. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
