From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mike D. Day" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] sysfs support for xen linux Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:12:31 -0500 Message-ID: <43C52E6F.9090901@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 5:21 AM Keir Fraser wrote: > Well, here's a question, and I really don't know the answer: It of > course makes sense that the kernel maintainers want drivers to > install themselves under /sys, and fit in with the whole kobject and > hotplug infrastructure. But, for a few odds-and-ends special files > that don't really relate to a device, is /proc also out of bounds > these days? Seems to me that the kernel proc interfaces were designed > to have a few random files thrown at them, in a way that the sysfs > interfaces aren't. If the argument is really that random special > files are a bad idea, that would continue to hold regardless of > whether we move e.g., /proc/xen/privcmd to /sys. I think that /sys is clearly the right place to put information about Xen, including version, domains and domain info, and perhaps info about xenstore. This is according to feedback received when I submitted my first (braindead) patch moving /proc/xen to /proc/sys/xen. Still I agree that we need input from lkml and am going to cross-post an RFC so we can move forward. regards, Mike -- Mike D. Day STSM and Architect, Open Virtualization IBM Linux Technology Center ncmike@us.ibm.com