Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: procfs problems | From | Benny Amorsen <> | Date | 29 Apr 1997 16:35:34 +0200 |
| |
>>>>> "PW" == Perry Wagle <wagle@tuple.cse.ogi.edu> writes:
PW> Here's my take on the procfs thing:
PW> I want to have my modules add things to /proc (char devices, PW> directories, etc.) so I can talk to the kernel-land stuff from PW> user-land. I'd like the communications to be fast, so will PW> probably avoid ascii streams, but I might get tired of debugging PW> that and opt for "easily machine parsable". I don't find writing PW> PERL (and TK) scripts to present it to humans to be hard. In PW> addition, this keeps some code bloat out of the kernel.
If I need a program to read a /proc file, I could just as easily make a kernel call instead of imposing the additional overhead of a pseudo-filesystem. If this is the view most people have, I say dump /proc altogether.
Personally I use /proc as a debugging tool, which makes human-readability an absolute must. /proc is plenty fast for most of the stuff it is used for.
Benny
| |