Subject: Re: patch sysfs-implement-sysfs-tagged-directory-support.patch added to gregkh-2.6 tree

From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:43:21 -0500

Quoting Tejun Heo ([email-masked]):
> Hello,
> 
> On 04/30/2010 04:29 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Hmm, but looking back over the previous thread (Mar 31) I guess you
> > mean more in-line comments around the callbacks, presumably things
> > like class_dir_child_ns_type() and struct kobj_ns_type_operations
> > members?
> 
> In-line.  What they're, how they're supposed to be used, which calling
> context is expected, what can be returned and so on.
> 
> > It sounds like what you'd really like is to have any explicit
> > mention to namespaces pulled out of drivers/base (layering as you
> > keep saying)?  But will there be a use for this outside of
> > namespaces?  Does trying to anticipate that fall into the category
> > of over-abstraction?
> 
> I wouldn't mind limited amount of layering exceptions as long as
> they're clearly documented.  What I'm primarily worried about is not
> the possibility of other users but more the obfuscation of the whole
> sysfs-kobject-driver model thing which is already overly abstracted
> and obfuscated (at least it seems to me that way).
> 
> NS needs tagged support in the driver model which in itself is fine
> and I also understand that from someone who's primarily working on NS,
> adding a bit on top of the whole thing wouldn't seem like much of a
> problem.  To me it seems like worsening a problem which is already
> pretty bad.  I hope you could understand my POV too.

I do.  I can take a stab monday at pushing a cloned version of Eric's
tree with comments added, if Eric doesn't have time.  (Or a patch on
top of Greg's tree)

thanks,
-serge