[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Magic SysRq +# in 2.4.9-ac/2.4.10-pre12

> > 2. I'd really prefer to see callers use
> > register_sysrq_key() and unregister_sysrq_key() so that they
> > can get/use return values, and not the lower-level functions
> > "__sysrq*" functions that are EXPORTed in sysrq.c.
> > I don't see a good reason to EXPORT all of these functions.
> So would I, however, the lower interface is there so that modules can
> restructure the table in more complex ways, allowing for sub-menus.

This is kernel, and sysrq was designed to be debug tool. It turned out
to be more successfull than expected...

Just keep in mind its a debug tool. If you need hierarchical submenus,
then you are probably not using it as debug tool, right?
I'm "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at
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 13:03    [W:0.134 / U:1.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site