On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:17:09 -0800
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 05:08:49PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 19:56:25 -0500
> > Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > So the question really is are we really done making changes to sysfs,
> > > or maybe what we should do is talk about major version numbers to
> > > sysfs.
> >
> > Perhaps using a config option wasn't the right way to do this - a kernel
> > boot parameter might be better.
>
> Ok, I have no problem with that if people really want it. But give me
> the option to also make it a config option so I don't have to change our
> bootloaders too.
Sometimes we provide a config option which provides the default version of
the boot option. So:
CONFIG_SYSFS_VERSION=1.2
and
if (user_provided_sysfs_version == NULL)
user_provided_sysfs_version = CONFIG_SYSFS_VERSION;
> Does that sound acceptable?
If we make CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED just a boolean boot option then that
fixes this problem (we hope) but won't help us next time we want to change
something.
It all depends on whether sysfs is finished yet ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
