Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262382AbVD2Etb (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:49:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262345AbVD2Et3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:49:29 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:47794 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262194AbVD2EtK (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:49:10 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:28:06 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Kylene Hall Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10 of 12] Fix Tpm driver -- sysfs owernship changes Message-ID: <20050429042806.GB25585@kroah.com> References: <20050428041915.GD9723@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1782 Lines: 43 On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 03:40:16PM -0500, Kylene Hall wrote: > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 05:19:03PM -0500, Kylene Hall wrote: > > > - device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_pubek); > > > - device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_pcrs); > > > - device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &dev_attr_caps); > > > + for (i = 0; i < TPM_NUM_ATTR; i++) > > > + device_remove_file(&pci_dev->dev, &chip->vendor->attr[i]); > > > > Use an attribute group, instead of this. That will allow you to get > > rid of the TPM_NUM_ATTR value, and this looney macro: > > > > > +#define TPM_DEVICE_ATTRS { \ > > > + __ATTR(pubek, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_pubek, NULL), \ > > > + __ATTR(pcrs, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_pcrs, NULL), \ > > > + __ATTR(caps, S_IRUGO, tpm_show_caps, NULL), \ > > > + __ATTR(cancel, S_IWUSR | S_IWGRP, NULL, tpm_store_cancel) } > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > Ok, the patch below has the same functionality as the previous patch but > gets rid of the macro and implements an attribute_group. Is there any way > to avoid the repeated code in every tpm_specific file to setup the > attribute_group and still ensure the files are owned by the tpm_specific > module? The only thing I can come up with is either not using the > TPM_DEVICE macro at all or creating with TPM_DEVICE macro and then > changing the owner field. Why are you trying to split this driver up into such tiny pieces? What's wrong with one driver for all devices? thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/