[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:0.017 / U:9.292 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site