Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] cxgb4: Add main driver file and driver Makefile

From: Dimitris Michailidis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:34:31 -0700

David Miller wrote:

>> So, I propose getting rid of 3-4 of these files that are of lesser
>> value and moving the rest to debugfs for now.  If some alternative
>> through ethtool or something becomes available I can get rid of
>> anything that can be handled through a more general facility.  Would
>> that be acceptable?
> 
> You can use sysfs.

sysfs is a possibility but I thought Stephen's initial concern was that I 
was adding too many of these proc files and that they were creating a 
potential API.  sysfs will result in a lot more files with its 
value-per-file model and I think sysfs and proc are similar in "APIness". 
So it's not clear to me how going to sysfs would address Stephen's point. 
The remove-a-few plus move-to-debugfs proposal was in order to end up with 
fewer files in a non-API filesystem.

As these builtin switches become more common I expect an official way to 
represent and access them will emerge but maybe it's not a good idea to 
introduce a sysfs model for them as part of this driver submission.