Re: [PATCH] 2.5.31 driverfs: patch for your consideration

From: Greg KH (
Date: Sun Aug 18 2002 - 16:46:17 EST

On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 10:32:30PM +0000, Adam Belay wrote:
> Also after looking at the interface code I realized that not just my
> code used sprintf. Do you think they should all use snprintf instead
> or is the probability of a driver attribute exceeding the one page
> buffer size so low that it doesn't matter?

snprintf is always a good idea to be using.

> Also I was wondering if you think resource management variables (irq,
> io, dma, etc) should live in the device structure like power management
> variables do?

Lots of different devices do not have irq, io, and dma assigned to them
(like every USB device). These values should be on a per-bus type (i.e.
most pci devices _do_ have those types of values.

> Global resource management seams interesting to me, although there
> already is a proc interface that does list resources, I'm wondering if
> the driver model is a good place to put such an interface?

Yes it is a good place to put them, as almost every /proc file that does
not deal with processes will eventually be moving to this fs.


greg k-h
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 23 2002 - 22:00:15 EST