Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758518Ab0LNTak (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:30:40 -0500 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:38696 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751421Ab0LNTah (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:30:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:29:52 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Sebastian Ott Cc: Kay Sievers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] bind/unbind uevent Message-ID: <20101214192952.GA9106@suse.de> References: <20101207162755.GA32328@suse.de> <20101207183305.GA21802@suse.de> <20101208160255.GB10313@suse.de> <20101213193617.GA18262@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2665 Lines: 62 On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 07:26:40PM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 08:27:45PM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > > On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:18:27AM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 19:33, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 06:29:37PM +0100, Sebastian Ott wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> So I'm searching for a trigger when these attributes are created, or > > > > > > >> in other words when the device is useable, which I think translates to > > > > > > >> when a driver is bound to this device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, KOBJ_ADD is the correct one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If your driver is creating sysfs attributes on its own, that's a bug and > > > > > > > should be fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds a bit like the driver should create its own child device with > > > > > > its own properties, instead of mangling around with attributes at a > > > > > > device it binds to. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I get that feeling too. But I'm talking about existing drivers > > > > > and I don't think I can change their whole structure. > > > > > > > > It's just a matter of putting the attributes in a table and passing that > > > > to the bus code the driver registers with. Only a minor change in the > > > > driver is needed to resolve this. > > > > > > I don't get it. The current situation is, that our drivers > > > add attributes to the device they are about to bind with, in > > > the probe function. > > > > Don't do that, have your _driver_ register the attributes with the bus > > it is on, then when the binding happens, the attributes will > > automatically get created for the device before the notification is sent > > to userspace. That is the proper proceedure here. > > are you suggesting that these driver specific device attributes should be > created by the bus code which registers the device? Yes. > at this time it is not determinable which driver will bind to the device > (and therefore which attributes to create), also driver specific data may > not be initialized. {sigh} Please go _look_ at how the driver model handles this type of thing. It does _exactly_ what you want, as we have been doing it for _years_ properly. 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/