Hi Keiichi,
> Please do consider configfs. Note that we'll have to lose the sysfs
> symlink from your target's kobject to the kobject of the ethernet
> device if we switch to configfs, but was that symlink needed for
> some essential functionality or was it simply for informational
> purpose?
Hello Satyam,
Hmm, I might've missed this thread, but my opinion on the
alternatives, fwiw:
1. I think adding new ioctl's to the kernel are generally disliked for
obvious reasons. Perhaps Stephen meant to add some generic
ioctl's above (and not separate ones specially implemented for
the
Hello Satyam,
Hmm, I might've missed this thread, but my opinion on the
alternatives, fwiw:
1. I think adding new ioctl's to the kernel are generally disliked for
obvious reasons. Perhaps Stephen meant to add some generic
ioctl's above (and not separate ones specially implemented for
the
Hi Keiichi,
Please do consider configfs. Note that we'll have to lose the sysfs
symlink from your target's kobject to the kobject of the ethernet
device if we switch to configfs, but was that symlink needed for
some essential functionality or was it simply for informational
purpose? IMHO,
Hi again Keiichi,
On 6/19/07, Keiichi KII <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Satyam,
> *ugh*. I was wondering what a show-stopper this particular patch
> was -- introduces a couple of ioctl()'s, exports a new structure to
> userspace, adds a hitherto-unneeded header file, brings in
>
Hello Satyam,
*ugh*. I was wondering what a show-stopper this particular patch
was -- introduces a couple of ioctl()'s, exports a new structure to
userspace, adds a hitherto-unneeded header file, brings in
tty_struct/tty_operations and ends up adding so much complexity/
bloat to netconsole.c.
Hello Satyam,
*ugh*. I was wondering what a show-stopper this particular patch
was -- introduces a couple of ioctl()'s, exports a new structure to
userspace, adds a hitherto-unneeded header file, brings in
tty_struct/tty_operations and ends up adding so much complexity/
bloat to netconsole.c.
Hi again Keiichi,
On 6/19/07, Keiichi KII [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Satyam,
*ugh*. I was wondering what a show-stopper this particular patch
was -- introduces a couple of ioctl()'s, exports a new structure to
userspace, adds a hitherto-unneeded header file, brings in
Hi Keiichi,
On 6/13/07, Keiichi KII <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Keiichi KII <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We add ioctls for adding/removing target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_ADD_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically add netconsole target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_REMOVE_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically remoe
From: Keiichi KII <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We add ioctls for adding/removing target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_ADD_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically add netconsole target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_REMOVE_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically remoe netconsole target.
We attach a sample program for ioctl.
From: Keiichi KII [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We add ioctls for adding/removing target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_ADD_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically add netconsole target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_REMOVE_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically remoe netconsole target.
We attach a sample program for ioctl.
Hi Keiichi,
On 6/13/07, Keiichi KII [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Keiichi KII [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We add ioctls for adding/removing target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_ADD_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically add netconsole target.
If we use NETCONSOLE_REMOVE_TARGET ioctl,
we can dynamically remoe
12 matches
Mail list logo
