On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:00:42 -0700 Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > And, one final complaint, never use "raw" kobjects, for loads of good > reasons, not the least being you just prevented userspace from seeing > what is happening with your devices. Use the driver model, that's > what it is there for, if you need "sub children", or subdirectories. I chose to use to kobjects for the reason that userspace can see the device linking more clearly. Let me try to paraphrase, I have two options: 1. if I use the platform device model instead of raw kobjects, I would have one platform device for each rapl domain. Then link individual platform device with the generic thermal layer sysfs. 2. In the current patch, I have one platform driver, then expose per domain kobject that can be linked to the generic thermal layer. Common attributes of all domains are grouped under the kset. I did consider both options. I thought using #2 option is better since it allow user to discover the topologies easier by following the sysfs link. If i use use #1, it would be hard to expose the common attributes and more code too. Perhpas I misread Documentation/kobjects.txt which i thought kobject/kset are perfect for presenting situation like this. -- Thanks, Jacob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
