Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

If you argue that they are in fact created by the user because they are a direct result of a user action, then I can apply the same argument to this one example: ... This is precisely what configfs is designed to forbid. The kernel does not, ever, create configfs objects on its own. It does it

Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

If you argue that they are in fact created by the user because they are a direct result of a user action, then I can apply the same argument to this one example: ... This is precisely what configfs is designed to forbid. The kernel does not, ever, create configfs objects on its own. It does it

Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

Thanks for your reply again! See comments inline... Joel Becker wrote: I fully agree with the idea of configfs not being allowed to destroy user-created objects. OTOH, while configfs is described as a filesystem for user-created objects under user control, compared to sysfs as a filesystem for

Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

Thanks for your reply again! See comments inline... Joel Becker wrote: I fully agree with the idea of configfs not being allowed to destroy user-created objects. OTOH, while configfs is described as a filesystem for user-created objects under user control, compared to sysfs as a filesystem for

Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

I'm sorry if I missed your previous post. I've never ignored a configfs post on purpose :-) Well, thanks a lot for the reply! :) Here's the issue... the configfs system can prevent a user from _creating_ sub-directories in a certain directory (by not supplying struct

Re: configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

I'm sorry if I missed your previous post. I've never ignored a configfs post on purpose :-) Well, thanks a lot for the reply! :) Here's the issue... the configfs system can prevent a user from _creating_ sub-directories in a certain directory (by not supplying struct

configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

Hi again, I've posted this before but without getting any replies. Please, somebody either give a (short) reply to this or simply explain why they think this is OT or not worth answering... Here's the issue... the configfs system can prevent a user from _creating_ sub-directories in a

configfs: return value for drop_item()/make_item()?

Hi again, I've posted this before but without getting any replies. Please, somebody either give a (short) reply to this or simply explain why they think this is OT or not worth answering... Here's the issue... the configfs system can prevent a user from _creating_ sub-directories in a

configfs issues

Hi all, I've got some issues with using configfs in my module. The problem I ran into could be solved if configfs_group_operations->drop_item() would allow returning an error code. But I'll try to explain... (1) Say the user creates one object, let's say as objects/myobj1/. This object is

configfs issues

Hi all, I've got some issues with using configfs in my module. The problem I ran into could be solved if configfs_group_operations-drop_item() would allow returning an error code. But I'll try to explain... (1) Say the user creates one object, let's say as objects/myobj1/. This object is