Re: another unusual flag for a really limited device
Doug Maxey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.usb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 09:09:06 PST, Matthew Dharm wrote: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:54:17PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > > > > I'm somewhat tempted to actually just convert the _64 flag to a _MIN flag, > > > and make the issue of finding an "optimal" value a userspace problem. I > > > think you can get to this parameter via sysfs, right? > > > > In fact there are two separate sysfs interfaces for that parameter! > > One in usb-storage and one in the generic block queue code. In theory > > we could remove ours, but it's already an established userspace API so > > we should hesitate before getting rid of it. > > We should at least be thinking about merging them. It's not like ours > manipulates anything usb-storage or SCSI specific; it just calls > blk_queue_max_sectors > > Perhaps we could turn ours into a symlink to the one provided by the block > queue code? Any pointer to an example? Or do I finally need to really get in and study the sysfs code? :) ++doug ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel