Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 May 2002 18:55:37 +0200 | From | Jan Kara <> | Subject | Re: Linux-2.5.17 |
| |
Hello,
> Uz.ytkownik Alexander Viro napisa?: > > > >On Wed, 22 May 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote: > > > > > >>Or are are you going to reinvent just enother > >>case of /proc/ formatting compatibility problems?! > >>And the requirement to have /proc mounted for quoate usage?! > >> > >>I hate /proc/my/random/sandbox/becouse/I/dont/knwo/unix/and/have/no/taste > >>interfaces more and more... > >> > >>(PS. Hah! I found finally someone today who deserves flames! :-).) > > > > > >Gives the phrase "finding yourself" a whole new meaning, doesn't it? > > > >Al, deeply PO'd by assorted cretinisms _not_ related to the kernel. > >Sigh... > > Lokking at 2.5.17 I see the following: > > -#define QUOTAFILENAME "quota" > -#define QUOTAGROUP "staff" > > > As usuall we can see what goes to /proc is apparently > random bulls*it as always. I love in esp. the assumption about > some group name on a system! > But it get's removed this time. So let's peer where > it get's reintroduced: gets reintroduced? I think I removed QUOTAGROUP forever...
> Ah... yes, patch-2.5.17, here it is: > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS > +static int read_stats(char *buffer, char **start, off_t offset, int count, > int *eof, void *data) > +{ > + <snip>
> return len; > +} > +#endif > > What can we see in the above: > > 1. Those are first grade candidates for sysctl read-only entires, since they > are system global statistics which should belong to /proc/sys/fs/ > We even have already fs.dquot-nr there! Why the hell don't put them > alongside? > > 2. Typical string formating and value copy and termination > problems inherent to string stuff... I agree that the proc code isn't good (maybe you missed the mail from Christoph Hellwing and my answer to it...) and should be replaced.
> 3. The futile hope that tools using it will even bother to check the > Version... gtop just *right today* showed that user space programmers > won't care about it, so it gains us literally *nothing*. The hope isn't futile I think. At least quota tools (which are IMHO the most interesting) are checking the version and warning user about too new kernel.
> If it where sysctl numbers they would just vanish beneath them if something > changed semantincally and they *would have no chance* to do it wrong. The version isn't there only for format of that quota file in proc. It's *mainly* used for detection of kernel interface to use. Previously tools had to try a few quotactl()s and from their results they had to guess the quota format etc. With version somewhere it's a bit easier... Looking forward to next flame from you ;)
Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> SuSE CR Labs - 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/
| |