On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:28:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Joel Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The fact that sysfs and configfs have similar backing stores > > does not make them the same thing. > > > > Sure, but all that copying-and-pasting really sucks. I'm sure there's some > way of providing the slightly different semantics from the same codebase?
The way that configfs and sysfs create/destroy dentries and
their associated inodes is very different from the top, yet similar from
the bottom. I suspect that some of it could be libraryized. When I
first looked started configfs, I was starting from an "add on to sysfs"
perspective, after all. The sysfs maintainers and I agreed, after much
discussion, that we should go to a separate tree.
Joel
--
"Here's a nickle -- get yourself a better X server."
- Keith Packard
http://www.jlbec.org/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
