Re: [PATCH] RCU torture testing

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 07:28:10AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 05:11:37PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 11:20:56AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > +The CONFIG_RCU_TORTURE_TEST config option is available for all RCU
> > > +implementations.  It makes three /proc entries available, namely: rcutw,
> > > +rcutr, and rcuts.
> > 
> > Ick, why /proc entries, this has nothing to do with processes, right?
> > Please use debugfs instead, that is what it was created for.
> 
> OK, will look into that.  At first glance, it does appear to require
> quite a bit more code to make use of than did the /proc filesystem,

I wasn't going for "least lines of code" here, like I did for sysfs.
Although if you do have a "simple" datatype, it's less code than for
procfs.

> if you want the files to produce human-readable strings, as is appropriate
> in this case.  I am looking at uhci-debug.c -- is there an example that
> better matches what I am trying to do?

Just provide a "read" function, that's exactly what people do for proc
these days, it shouldn't be tough to switch over.

thanks,

greg k-h