[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: sysfs q [was: sysfs ugly timer interface]

On Mar 22 2007 21:48, Greg KH wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 02:24:46AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Mar 22 2007 08:28, Greg KH wrote:
>> Question regarding sysfs files: How would you do something like
>> /proc/net/nf_conntrack with sysfs? Have directories named like 0000,
>> 0001, 0002, ..?
>I don't know, I've never said that _all_ proc files can move to sysfs.
>For some things, like possibly the netfilter stuff, proc files make
>more sense.

But proc is for procs. (At least its name indicates.)

>Were you thinking of moving this file to sysfs?

No, not that one. But new modules. Everyone says "please no new /proc
files"[some examples, 1,2]. On the other hand,


>>>> root@MAIN:/home/maxim# cat /sys/devices/system/clockevents/clockevents0/registered
>>>> lapic F:0007 M:3(periodic) C: 1
>>>> hpet F:0003 M:1(shutdown) C: 0
>>>> lapic F:0007 M:3(periodic) C: 0
>>>> root@MAIN:/home/maxim#
>>> Now... this file needs to die, before 2.6.21 is released. It tries to
>>> bring /proc-like parsing nightmare to sysfs. Kill it before it becomes
>>> part of stable ABI!

when there's a proc-style multi-line file like that clockevents thing in
sysfs, people raise objections too (see above), which leads me to the
question: if neither procfs nor sysfs are appropriate for such files,
what is?

>What does the information in it represent?

A list of the currently tracked connections.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-23 07:09    [W:0.072 / U:11.412 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site