> I don't understand why you would use a device for this which > seems to me is just another control function. Doesn't this > function belong in sysfs too?
To me, the distinction is between controlling the function and the transfer of information resulting from the function, which may be a stream of arbitrary length. Sysfs (IMHO) isn't really intended for things that can return 16-20K responses. You could make an argument for doing it both ways; I happen to like the control/result separation model that Plan 9 and SysV streams use, so the actual data and the control are separate in my mind. BTW, this type of approach also lets languages other than C adapt easily -- think for a momment about how you would call an ioctl-based interface from Fortran. Not a trivial problem, but I have a lot of users who care deeply about Fortran 77. -- db ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
