Re: [PATCH] 2.5 PROPOSAL: Replacement for current /proc of shit.

[Rusty Russell]

In message <[e-mail]> you write:
> Yes, sold, if implementing the formatter is part of the plan.
> 
> Caveat: by profiling I've found that file ops on proc functions are already
> eating a significant amount of cpu, going to one-value-per-file is going to 
> make that worse.  But maybe this doesn't bother you.

What concerns me most is the pain involved in writing a /proc or
sysctl interface in the kernel today.  Take kernel/module.c's
get_ksyms_list as a typical example: 45 lines of code to perform a
very trivial task.  And this code is sitting in your kernel whether
proc is enabled or not.  Now, I'm a huge Al Viro fan, but his proposed
improvements are in the wrong direction, IMHO.

My first priority is to have the most fool-proof possible inner kernel
interface.  Second is trying to preserve some of the /proc features
which actually work well when correctness isn't a huge issue (such as
"give me everything in one table").  Efficiency of getting these
things out of the kernel is a distant last (by see my previous comment
on adapting sysctl(2)).

I'd like to see /proc (/proc/sys) FINALLY live up to its promise
(rich, logical, complete) in 2.5.  We can do this by making it the
simplest option for coders and users.

Rusty.
--
Premature optmztion is rt of all evl. --DK