[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5 PROPOSAL: Replacement for current /proc of shit.
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 05:42:36AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > proc(KBUILD_OBJECT, "foo", my_foo, int, 0644);
> >
> > And with my previous parameter patch:
> > PARAM(foo, int, 0444);
> Is this designed to replace sysctl?
> In general we want to support using sysctl and similar features WITHOUT
> procfs support at all (of any type). Nice for embedded systems
> especially.

Agreed. It would be nice to have always 1:1 relation between sysctl and
procfs interface, so you can do EVERYTHING with both of sysctl and via
/proc ... Maybe the code should be partly common as much as possible as well.

- Gabor
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.204 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site