Re: sysfs q [was: sysfs ugly timer interface]

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Mar 22 2007 21:48, Greg KH wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 02:24:46AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Mar 22 2007 08:28, Greg KH wrote:
>> 
>> Question regarding sysfs files: How would you do something like 
>> /proc/net/nf_conntrack with sysfs? Have directories named like 0000, 
>> 0001, 0002, ..?
>
>I don't know, I've never said that _all_ proc files can move to sysfs. 
>For some things, like possibly the netfilter stuff, proc files make 
>more sense.

But proc is for procs. (At least its name indicates.)

>Were you thinking of moving this file to sysfs?

No, not that one. But new modules. Everyone says "please no new /proc 
files"[some examples, 1,2]. On the other hand,

[1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/21/34
[2] http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/2/3/285

>>>> root@MAIN:/home/maxim# cat /sys/devices/system/clockevents/clockevents0/registered                         
>>>> lapic                F:0007 M:3(periodic) C: 1
>>>> hpet                 F:0003 M:1(shutdown) C: 0
>>>> lapic                F:0007 M:3(periodic) C: 0
>>>> root@MAIN:/home/maxim#
>>>                                                                            
>>> Now... this file needs to die, before 2.6.21 is released. It tries to
>>> bring /proc-like parsing nightmare to sysfs. Kill it before it becomes
>>> part of stable ABI!

when there's a proc-style multi-line file like that clockevents thing in 
sysfs, people raise objections too (see above), which leads me to the 
question: if neither procfs nor sysfs are appropriate for such files, 
what is?


>What does the information in it represent?

A list of the currently tracked connections.



Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/