Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-04 Thread Dave Young
On Dec 4, 2007 4:20 PM, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 03:53:15PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > On Dec 4, 2007 3:46 PM, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 02:45:47PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-04 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 03:53:15PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On Dec 4, 2007 3:46 PM, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 02:45:47PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > Hi, > > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? > > > seems > > > not . And

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-04 Thread Robert P. J. Day
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 01:50:53AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Dave Young wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? > > > seems not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Dave Young
On Dec 4, 2007 3:46 PM, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 02:45:47PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > Hi, > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems > > not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? > > No, not anymore,

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 01:50:53AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Dave Young wrote: > > > Hi, > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems > > not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? > > > > In the kobject_set_name

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 02:45:47PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > Hi, > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems > not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? No, not anymore, the kobject name is totally dynamic. > In the kobject_set_name, the

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Dave Young
On Dec 4, 2007 2:50 PM, Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Dave Young wrote: > > > Hi, > > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems > > not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? > > > > In the kobject_set_n

Re: The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Robert P. J. Day
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Dave Young wrote: > Hi, > Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems > not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? > > In the kobject_set_name, the limit is 1024. Looks like either the comment or > the code should be upda

The use of KOBJ_NAME_LEN

2007-12-03 Thread Dave Young
Hi, Does the KOBJ_NAME_LEN really means the limit of kobject name length? seems not . And if it's true, is the KOBJ_NAME_LEN of 20 enough to use? In the kobject_set_name, the limit is 1024. Looks like either the comment or the code should be updated. /** * kobject_set_name - Set the name