David...Do you have any way to quantify your assertion? It would seem to me
> I believe it's cleaner and a bit faster, once you don't have to do a
> lot of if's as you do into ioctl().
that traversing some procfs hierarchy is less efficient than using
procfs is not a good place for driver's stuff, but sysfs is.
ioctl(). Also, (1) is ioctl() really being phased-out, (2) is sysctl
preferred over devfs, and (3) why in either case? Thanks!
1) I don't think it's phased-out. It's needed for driver control.
2) sysfs is a better solution to place some driver's parameters, instead of using ioctl(). But sysfs does not replace it for all situations.
3) It is a cleaner way to configure driver and, sometimes, ioctl() does a lot of if's until reach the right action, while sysfs just avoids it.
Br,
David Cohen
--
Gary Chambers
// -------------------------------------
// Advanced SatComm Systems & Operations
// MIT Lincoln Laboratory / 781-981-0957
// Lexington, Massachusetts
// Nothing fancy and nothing Microsoft
// -------------------------------------
