On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:27:19 -0700, greg@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > With the recent discussion of dropping usbfs, the reliance on the file, > "devices" was discussed a lot. Alan suggested putting it in debugfs, > which I liked, so I created this patch series. [] >From my perspective it's not great, because debugfs is not usually mounted. If you could, say, stuff it into /proc/usb or something that would be great :-) Down with procfs absolutists. But I can live with that. It's just incovenient to explain to users how to mount the filesystem, and also devices file was readable without privileges. > Pete, note that I moved the usbmon directory, but I think you have some > scripts and tools that is looking for the usbmon directory in the root > of debugfs. So I created a symlink. Does this keep the tools working? Like I care, it's debugfs. We can make it print XML tomorrow. If people want their tools working, they should use /dev/usbmon0, a Linux ABI, and not just some random files in debugfs. > Everyone else, any objection to these changes? I am concerned that you're trying to make debugfs even more API than it was already but stuffing useful stuff in it (the devices file). Honestly, Mackall's attempts to use the (deprecated) text interface of usbmon as an argument pissed me off. -- Pete -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
