Messages in this thread |  | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] 2.5 PROPOSAL: Replacement for current /proc of shit. | Date | Tue, 06 Nov 2001 09:48:52 +1100 |
| |
In message <20011105033316Z16051-18972+45@humbolt.nl.linux.org> you write: > Yes, sold, if implementing the formatter is part of the plan. > > Caveat: by profiling I've found that file ops on proc functions are already > eating a significant amount of cpu, going to one-value-per-file is going to > make that worse. But maybe this doesn't bother you.
What concerns me most is the pain involved in writing a /proc or sysctl interface in the kernel today. Take kernel/module.c's get_ksyms_list as a typical example: 45 lines of code to perform a very trivial task. And this code is sitting in your kernel whether proc is enabled or not. Now, I'm a huge Al Viro fan, but his proposed improvements are in the wrong direction, IMHO.
My first priority is to have the most fool-proof possible inner kernel interface. Second is trying to preserve some of the /proc features which actually work well when correctness isn't a huge issue (such as "give me everything in one table"). Efficiency of getting these things out of the kernel is a distant last (by see my previous comment on adapting sysctl(2)).
I'd like to see /proc (/proc/sys) FINALLY live up to its promise (rich, logical, complete) in 2.5. We can do this by making it the simplest option for coders and users.
Rusty. -- Premature optmztion is rt of all evl. --DK - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |