Re: Yet another design for /proc. Or actually /kernel.
Martin Dalecki (dalecki@evision-ventures.com)
Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:31:56 +0100
Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> Ricky Beam <jfbeam@bluetopia.net> said:
> > >the discussion is irrelevant. Despite what everybody thinks, Linus thinks
> > >/proc must be not binary, so it will stay that way for those of us who run
> > >Linus kernels...
> >
> > Linus has been "wrong" before. It will require good code and numbers
> > backing that codes "goodness" before Linus will begin to listen. Yes,
> > a new procfs format will break a great deal of userland toys, so the
> > changes had better be worth it and sufficient to never, EVER require
> > a complete overhaul in the future.
>
> /proc for process info is a given (many Unices have it, it is nice at least
> for compatibility).
>
> /proc for random other garbage should go away. To get at some value you can
> get via specialized calls by read(2) also is just kernel bloat.
My absolute favourite is the following in arch/i386/kernel/irq.c!!!!
Disease symptoms like this are distributed all over the kernel code.
========================================================================
static struct proc_dir_entry * root_irq_dir;
static struct proc_dir_entry * irq_dir [NR_IRQS];
#define HEX_DIGITS 8
static unsigned int parse_hex_value (const char *buffer,
unsigned long count, unsigned long *ret)
{
unsigned char hexnum [HEX_DIGITS];
unsigned long value;
int i;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/