[lkml]   [1997]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: procfs problems
On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, Christopher Horn wrote:
> Dan Hollis wrote:
> > If you look at the current pci.c, it is going to be exceedingly difficult
> > to jettison part of the tables, and only keep others.
> Well, maybe restructure isn't quite the right word, but it could be
> done.

Would it be worth the effort, vs. just dumping the whole thing into a
userspace program?

> > I think rewriting current stuff that uses procfs to use the sysctl()
> > interface would end up being a big win overall.
> I think the design goal behind the sysctl interface was different. While
> it could probably be used to eliminate some of the proc files like
> cmdline and cpuinfo, there are many others it can not easily handle.


> > I still maintain that the pci parser belongs in user space.
> Also a valid solution, which saves a little room from the start. A
> utility could be called as part of the system startup that reported on
> installed devices and notified the user of unknown devices it may have
> found.

Seeing as that the kernel doesn't display this information on bootup as it
stands now, why change the behaviour?


 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.151 / U:3.116 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site