On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 10:27:46AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Greg KH wrote: > > > Simple? Are you crazy? > > my emotional stability has nothing to do with this. try to focus, > greg. :-P Heh. > > > i'm trying to clarify the interconnection between all of the sysfs > > > structures, so a few questions: > > > > > > 1) is it true that an entry exists at the top of the sysfs if and only > > > if it is a subsystem? there's no notion of a lower-level subsystem, > > > is there? that is, subsystems aren't defined recursively. > > > > No, you can create an entry at the top if you use a kobject with no > > parent. > > ah, now that wasn't obvious from any explanation i've read. so if you > look at a subsystem structure, it has a "kset" member, whose internal > "kobject" represents its position in the sysfs hierarchy. and it's > that internal kobject that represents a subsystem's position in the > hierarchy, is that it? Yes, that is correct. > in short, ksets and subsystems themselves are examples of "kobjects" > which define their position in the tree. ok, that definitely clears > things up a bit, and explains how subsystems can exist further down > the tree. > > more later after i do more reading. What specifically are you trying to figure out here? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
