lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] console: add /proc/consoles
    On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 05:25:32PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    > On 11/03/2010 05:22 PM, Greg KH wrote:
    > > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 05:16:11PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    > >> On 11/03/2010 05:13 PM, Greg KH wrote:
    > >>> On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 04:35:09PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    > >>>> It allows users to see what consoles are currently known to the system
    > >>>> and with what flags.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> It is based on Werner's patch, the part about traversing fds was
    > >>>> removed, the code was moved to kernel/printk.c, where consoles are
    > >>>> handled and it makes more sense to me.
    > >>>
    > >>> Why kernel/printk.c? I don't think that makes sense, it's just a random
    > >>> proc file, so why not put it into something like fs/proc/ instead?
    > >>>
    > >>> Does it rely on any functions in the printk.c file?
    > >>
    > >> No it doesn't. I will move it to fs/proc/ if that's preferred. I checked
    > >> how VM proc stuff is handled and it was in in mm/, so I put this into
    > >> kernel/...
    > >>
    > >> (Then it will depend on the console cleanup series which I sent few
    > >> minutes ago...)
    > >
    > > That's fine, I can take those through my tree as well, as it makes sense
    > > to do so.
    >
    > Actually where this code should be in fs/proc/? Most of the /proc/* is
    > handled elsewhere (fs/ mm/ kernel/). The rest is handled in specialized
    > fs/proc/FILE.c.

    What's wrong with putting it into fs/proc/proc_tty.c? That seems like
    the most logical thing to me...

    thanks,

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-11-03 18:51    [W:0.024 / U:31.280 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site