On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 03:59:38PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 08:20:18PM +0300, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote: > > So, I decided to reimplement it to be completely synchronous. SYSFS > > authors did really great job and thanks to the excellent internal SYSFS > > design and implementation it is absolutely safe. See: > > > > [root@tgt ~]# modprobe scst > > [root@tgt ~]# cd /sys/kernel/scst_tgt/ > > Sorry, but no, you can't put this in /sys/kernel/ without getting the > approval of the sysfs maintainer. > > I really don't understand why you are using kobjects in the first place, > why isn't this in the main device tree in the kernel, using 'struct > device'? > It is my understanding that Vlad is able to reflect the topology by manipulating sysfs objects there. > In the end, I guess it really doesn't matter as this code isn't getting > merged so I shouldn't worry about it, right? > This is quite unfortunate as I still have not seen the public comparison of the 2 implementations and the lists of benefits and shortfalls for both of them. -- Dmitry -- 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
