On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 03:23:31PM -0700, Joe Burks wrote: > At 02:30 PM 10/22/2002 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 12:49:06PM -0700, Joe Burks wrote: > >> static int > >> -vicam_write_proc(struct file *file, const char *buffer, > >> +vicam_write_proc(struct file *file, const char *buf, > >> unsigned long count, void *data) > > > >Thanks to Oliver, I just noticed this. > > > >Ick. Please use driverfs/sysfs, and have one value per file. A parser > >should not be in kernelspace. > > I have no problem changing this, though I think that the "standard" for a > V4L device was to offer control through a proc entry in the manner I was > using it. I had copied the code from the cpia driver which has been in > there for a long time unchanged. It also exists in the Zoran driver. The > usbvideo.c mini-driver also offers callback options to allow drivers to > create a proc entry and allow writes to it. The "write to proc entry" > mentality is fairly entrenched in V4L. > > So is it appropriate to break the long standing, but probably bad and not a > documented standard anyway, practice in this case?
Do user programs actually try to write to these proc files? If no, then yes, tradition should be broken here. thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net emial is sponsored by: Influence the future of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4699841;7576301;v?http://www.sun.com/javavote _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
