Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 02 Sep 2007 09:54:36 +0100 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sysctl: Deprecate sys_sysctl in a user space visible fashion. |
| |
Rob Landley wrote: > On Saturday 01 September 2007 5:16:03 pm Andi Kleen wrote: >> Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> writes: >>> A lot of embedded people like to configure /proc out of the kernel for >>> space reasons. This would make that noticeably more painful. >> I had a patch for a sysctl_name(2) for this a long time ago. >> If it was a serious issue that could be reintroduced. >> >> BTW sysctl(2) only needs to be quiet for a single sysctl used >> by glibc. >> >> -Andi > > Yeah, I found it: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2003/7/10/345 > > I think that if /proc/sys could be broken out as a separate filesystem, and it > was small and simple, the embedded people would probably be happy. Is your > patch significantly smaller than such a filesystem would be? (Keeping in > mind that the smallest thing you can do is run from initramfs, and I think > that's pulling in libfs already...) >
IMO, the big problem with /proc/sys (and, for that matter, /sys) is mainly that they have to live in the process namespace, which is highly awkward when one uses chroot().
One way to solve *that* might be a system call to get a file descriptor to the root of sysfs or procsysfs which can be used with openat(). That has its own perils, of course...
-hpa - 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/
| |