Hi Yani, > With respect to the lm_sensors chip drivers an int alone might make > sense (although for bmcsensors the void* is better), but when you > start looking at the rest of the kernel code that uses attributes the > void * looks like a very good decision. > > If you have a look at my patch for net-sysfs.c for example, its hard > (impossible?) to imagine a way to do a similar thing with just an int > being passed to the callbacks, and this is using static attributes. You could always define a static array of pointers, and use the passed int as an index to that array, thus converting the int into a pointer. It's not very different from defining a static array of ints and passing the int addresses as the void*, but for some reason I tend to prefer the int -> pointer conversion (most certainly because my view if awfully biased by my misknowledge of the kernel except for the i2c and hardware monitoring code). > Yes, it is starting to look like the cold hand of a dictator might be > needed ... where is Greg anyway ;-)? Don't blame him, I am wasting his time over IRC, this is why... ;) -- Jean Delvare
