[ovs-dev] brport_sysfs_ops

[Simon Horman]

On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:48:54AM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:53:38PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jesse,
> >> >
> >> > I just came across the following error:
> >> >
> >> > net/openvswitch/built-in.o:(.data+0x610): multiple definition of `brport_sysfs_ops'
> >> > net/bridge/built-in.o:(.rodata+0x1140): first defined here
> >> >
> >> > I seem to recall some discussion of these sysfs entries at the meeting in
> >> > Boston. Was the decision to remove them?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure that we actually reached a decision regarding sysfs
> >> entries.  However, I would be inclined to remove them now and then
> >> perhaps add a few back in later if needed.  A lot of them are purely
> >> for bridge compatibility and will most likely never make sense for
> >> Open vSwitch.  For the ones that do, we can figure it out once we know
> >> exactly how they will be used in their own right.
> >
> > I think that is a good strategy.
> >
> >> Unfortunately, this can probably only be done for the upstreamed
> >> version.  Since a number of people are using bridge compatibility from
> >> the Open vSwitch tree, we'll need to leave the sysfs code there.  I'm
> >> hoping that this won't be too difficult as the sysfs code is
> >> relatively self contained.
> >
> > Understood.
> >
> > The following patch seems to do the trick.
> > I'll include it in the merge.
> 
> This patch looks good but I think we can go a step farther.  There's a
> bunch of kobj stuff that is sprinkled around that was only used by
> sysfs.  I would be tempted to remove it now that we no longer need it.

I was wondering about that, I'll remove it.