On 05/13/2014 01:56 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>> Echoing filenames into files in configfs is strange at the very
>>> least. Think chroot, and what about permissions...?
>>>
>>> It would be much better to just cat bitstream into configfs...
>>
>> No binary attributes supported for configfs. Apparently this is done on
>> purpose.
>>
>> In fact it was my first idea about the configfs interface for DT overlays
>> but decided
>> to go with firmware file names instead.
>>
>> If this is valid use case (which seems to be) would patches adding binary
>> attributes
>> to configfs be accepted?
>
> I'd say this is very valid use, but I'm not configfs maintainer. It is
> certainly better then echoing filenames there.
>
Almost anything is better...
-hpa
--
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/
