> This program would have to be changed with every change in the kernel,
> including additions of third party modules. Most items in /proc are not
> read often enough to have any client programs that would benefit from
> the faster access via sysctl when weighed against the complexity cost.
> In addition, the CPU cost involved in exec'ing this program for every
> read by the user program would be orders of magnitude higher than the
> overhead of parsing fields in /proc.
I think I shall spend next weekend coding up a insmod'able module that you
can call using ioctl() calls to retrieve kernel information (i.e
NR_PROCESSORS, TYPE_PROCESSORS et. al), perhaps have the ability to write
kernel parameters, and publish the code here. Any takers?
I know that making sysctl() calls is better but my Linux bible (Linux
Device Drivers) doesn't mention anything about it, and so I don't know if
it's possible to make sysctl() calls to a module, unfortunately. If I
could, then I'd use sysctl() instead of ioctl().
Then hopefully this will put an end to this debate - as then some of you
can use /proc and some of us can use ioctl() (or sysctl() if possible)
via this module.
Cheers,
Alex.
--- /\_/\ Legalise cannabis now! ( o.o ) Grow some cannabis today! > ^ < Peace, Love, Unity and Respect to all.Check out http://www.tahallah.demon.co.uk Linux lo-pc3035a 2.1.125 #6 Fri Oct 9 13:53:00 EDT 1998 One Intel Pentium 75+ processor, 66.36 total bogomips, 16M RAM System library 5.4.44
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/