On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 04:40:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:28 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 07:36:27PM -0300, Daniel Gutson wrote: > > > +What: /sys/kernel/firmware-security/bioswe > > > > Ick, I stopped reading right here. > > > > No, this is not where this belongs. > > > > We already have /sys/firmware/, right? And firmware-specific > > subdirectories below that. > > > > We also have /sys/devices/system/ and I think that would be a much > > better place for this, as it is easier to work with a real 'struct > > device' than a "raw" kobject any day. Bonus is you get full support of > > userspace libraries when you do that, unlike when dealing with kobjects. > > > > Also, this really is a _SPECIFIC_ type of firmware that supports these > > features, right? Why not call that out too? This is not generic by any > > means. > > As I suggested in my previous review, I wouldn't worry too much about > the user interface at the start, but instead first work out how the hardware > support fits in with the existing drivers and once that looks fine decide > on how to export it to user space. > > I agree the /sys/kernel/firmware-security/bioswe sounds like the wrong > place, but I'm not sure if adding any other new directory in sysfs is > much better. I think the most promising would be to have it on the > sysfs directory for the device it refers to, but let's first see how the > information gets into the kernel.
Yes, the directory for the specific device would probably be best, but let's see where that really is :) thanks, greg k-h
