Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Oct 2005 07:48:56 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] RCU torture testing |
| |
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 07:28:10AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 05:11:37PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 11:20:56AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > +The CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST config option is available for all RCU > > > +implementations. It makes three /proc entries available, namely: rcutw, > > > +rcutr, and rcuts. > > > > Ick, why /proc entries, this has nothing to do with processes, right? > > Please use debugfs instead, that is what it was created for. > > OK, will look into that. At first glance, it does appear to require > quite a bit more code to make use of than did the /proc filesystem,
I wasn't going for "least lines of code" here, like I did for sysfs. Although if you do have a "simple" datatype, it's less code than for procfs.
> if you want the files to produce human-readable strings, as is appropriate > in this case. I am looking at uhci-debug.c -- is there an example that > better matches what I am trying to do?
Just provide a "read" function, that's exactly what people do for proc these days, it shouldn't be tough to switch over.
thanks,
greg k-h - 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/
| |