On 5/9/05, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core at ameritech.net> wrote: > On Monday 09 May 2005 00:01, Yani Ioannou wrote: > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > On 5/8/05, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core at ameritech.net> wrote: > > > Hi Yani, > > > > > > Yes, I see what you mean. But I think what we might need is actually 2 > > > void * pointers, something like "attribute_data" and "instance_data". > > > Macros would initialize "attribute_data" but not "instance_data". This > > > way their usage is clearly defined and there hopefully less confusion. > > > > > > -- > > > Dmitry > > > > > > > The naming might make the distinction in use, but nothing is really > > stopping anyone from using one or the other and it might even confuse > > further (i.e. not understanding the difference, using both, using the > > wrong one). Since the two would be mutually exclusive > > Why would they? Consider something like generic show function you give > it a pointer to data you want to be printed in instance_data and a pointer > to format string in attribute_data and that's it. Each `instance' would have to have it's own sysfs attribute (i.e. non-static/shared) to be able to set an instance specific pointer anyway, and so setting attribute_data for bother of those really doesn't make any sense to me. If you are looking to pass two (or more) pointers as in your example, just create a single struct containing them and point to it (although I'm trying not to do something like that in net-sysfs.c). Yani
