On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 03:55 -0700, David Miller wrote:
quoted text
> From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:50:44 +0100
> 
> > Certainly, it's possible that we'll need _more_ criteria for udev to
> > match on; that doesn't necessarily mean that dev_id shouldn't be one of
> > them, does it?
> 
> I've read what you have to say, and your point is logical.
> 
> However you've just also stated that dev_id isn't even needed to solve
> the particular problems you're interested in.

This is true (assuming udev gets fixed). 

quoted text
> I'm not against exporting the value.  But let's do it because it does
> solve a problem, not because it's fun to export every object instance
> variable via sysfs :-)

The reason I still submitted it, after realising that Marco's objections
to letting udev rely on the 'KERNEL==' match were bogus, is because I
think it does still help on S390 -- it lets us remove the special case
hack there.

I don't think it's actually _broken_ on S390 at the moment; just a bit
icky. That was sufficient motivation to still submit the patch :)

-- 
dwmw2

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html