Mitch Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The proc code is quite simple and straightforward, whereas i quickly fell > into a snakepit of interrelated structs when I tried to grok sysfs. And > the text representation requirement is a problem because OFW device tree > properties have specific serialization rules that include binary data in > many cases. > > The API for /proc is just fine. I wonder if we could essentially clone it > (or even reuse most of the functions verbatim), but mount it on /ofw .
Yes, sysfs can be a bit challenging to get a handle on. A /proc-like glue layer for a virtual filesystem wouldn't go over very well, but adapting the current /proc code into their filesystem equivalents should be a fairly straightforward task. jon _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
