From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 7 May 2002 14:55:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 7 May 2002 14:55:35 -0400 Received: from khms.westfalen.de ([62.153.201.243]:52153 "EHLO khms.westfalen.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 7 May 2002 14:55:33 -0400 Date: 07 May 2002 20:29:00 +0200 From: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <8OO85YGXw-B@khms.westfalen.de> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.14 IDE 56 X-Mailer: CrossPoint v3.12d.kh9 R/C435 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding? X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail. Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail. X-Fix-Your-Modem: +++ATS2=255&WO1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote on 07.05.02 in : > On Tue, 7 May 2002, Padraig Brady wrote: > > > > All the info I've ever needed is /proc/ide/hdx/capacity > > which I could get from /proc/partitions with more a bit > > more effort, so I vote for removing /proc/ide. > > Note that one thing that we might do is to leave the remnants of /proc/ide > but _without_ the very verbose per-chipset reporting. > > At least to me it looks like it's all the chipset reporting that causes > the huge kernel bloat, and it shouldn't be impossible to reinstate a > minimal /proc/ide without those parts - while still keeping most of the > backwards compatibility. What I'd like to see - in whatever exact form - is the IDE equivalent to /proc/scsi/scsi. (And in fact, the SCSI version could use addition of at least the disk size and the sdX mapping.) It's rather useful for getting a quick overview of what's on a system, and where. Incidentally, is there a compelling reason why block device boot messages are all different? > However, since I really don't much like the idea of having special > "ide-only" /proc files, I personally think any information people actually > used should be either in truly generic files (/proc/partitions as an > example), _or_ they should be in the generic device tree (talk to Pat > Mochel about that). /proc/bus/ide or something like that? Sure, why not? Exact place is pretty much irrelevant except to legacy code. MfG Kai