The only thing wrong with sysfs_do_something_in_a_different_task_context()
is the length of the name. "do", that's good, much better than "access".
sysfs_access_in_other_task() left me wondering what this "other" task
was, and what kind of "access" it's trying to get - or is the calling
task the other, and it's trying to access something it wouldn't
directly have access to?
True, though since he's saying "work" rather than "workstruct",
I was okay with that: it's a sysfs wrapper to schedule_work().
A lot happier than with sysfs_access_in_other_task() -
if you prefer this to Dmitry's, it's okay by me.