[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: debugfs in the namespace
    On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 02:45:31PM -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
    > On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:18:43 -0800, Greg KH <> wrote:
    > > Hm, what about /.debug ? That's a compromise that I can live with (even
    > > less key strokes to get to...)
    > No way, Jan is out of his mind, adding obfuscations like that. Anything
    > but that. I didn't even bother to reply, because it never occurred to me
    > that you'd fall for something so retarded.

    Bah, fine :)

    > Otherwise, /dbg sounds good.

    Ok, I can live with that.

    > Mike's objections sound philosophically congenial to me. What I'm trying
    > to have here is to support an equivalent of tcpdump, which some may consider
    > a core function rather than a debugging function. Of course, I could easily
    > say "this is for debugging only" and thus deflect Mike, but this is not
    > about winning, and actually I have no investment in any approach. For me the
    > /sys is obviously out because of the "one file one value" doctrine. The /proc
    > sounds attractive, but programming procfs is such a bother. If we had a debugfs
    > style API to procfs, that would be the winner from the standpoint of this
    > application. Failing that, I guess, it's /dbg.

    Yes, usb data dumping could go in /dbg, it makes sense.


    greg k-h
    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 14:08    [W:0.019 / U:25.180 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site