On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:37:19PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
> Modify the device class code so that normal manipulations work
> in the presence of shadow directories.  Some of the shadow directory
> support still needs to be implemented in the implementation of the
> class but these modifications are sufficient to make that simple.

This is a nice idea, but I'm working to get rid of 'struct class_device'
from the tree.  Network devices have already been converted, the patch
is in the -mm tree, I'm working on some firewire fixes before pushing it
to Linus.

So, I think you want to do this work for 'struct device' too, as that is
what will be the real user of this code.

thanks,

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:37:19PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> Modify the device class code so that normal manipulations work
>> in the presence of shadow directories.  Some of the shadow directory
>> support still needs to be implemented in the implementation of the
>> class but these modifications are sufficient to make that simple.
>
> This is a nice idea, but I'm working to get rid of 'struct class_device'
> from the tree.  Network devices have already been converted, the patch
> is in the -mm tree, I'm working on some firewire fixes before pushing it
> to Linus.
>
> So, I think you want to do this work for 'struct device' too, as that is
> what will be the real user of this code.

Sure.  That shouldn't be too hard.

Is any of that work in Dave Millers' networking tree?

I'm just trying to figure out where your work is, relative to the rest of
the networking stack.

I have a lot of networking infrastructure I need to touch.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 01:28:22PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:37:19PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> 
> >> Modify the device class code so that normal manipulations work
> >> in the presence of shadow directories.  Some of the shadow directory
> >> support still needs to be implemented in the implementation of the
> >> class but these modifications are sufficient to make that simple.
> >
> > This is a nice idea, but I'm working to get rid of 'struct class_device'
> > from the tree.  Network devices have already been converted, the patch
> > is in the -mm tree, I'm working on some firewire fixes before pushing it
> > to Linus.
> >
> > So, I think you want to do this work for 'struct device' too, as that is
> > what will be the real user of this code.
> 
> Sure.  That shouldn't be too hard.
> 
> Is any of that work in Dave Millers' networking tree?

No, it's in my tree, and in -mm.  It's all in one patch at:
	http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/gregkh-01-driver/network-device.patch
if you want to try it out.

Or you can try it with any of the subsystems that have already been
converted over to use the struct device code, like misc, mem, and many
others.  Just look for the symlinks in /sys/class/CLASS_NAME/ instead of
real subdirectories.

So I'd really prefer to not apply this patch, and just do this kind of
work for 'struct device' instead.

The first one looks fine, I'll add it to my queue.

thanks,

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> writes:

> Or you can try it with any of the subsystems that have already been
> converted over to use the struct device code, like misc, mem, and many
> others.  Just look for the symlinks in /sys/class/CLASS_NAME/ instead of
> real subdirectories.
>
> So I'd really prefer to not apply this patch, and just do this kind of
> work for 'struct device' instead.

I don't want to get stuck waiting for cleanups so I will keep this one,
even if you don't apply it :)  

But I will go figure out the equivalent version for struct device, as
it doesn't look like you are that far off from merging that version. :)

That way my code will work whichever code base I have to merge against.

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers