From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Add /proc/mempool to display mempool usage Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 12:02:10 -0800 Message-ID: <20081201120210.1ed16bd5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1227980689.6354.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20081129214207.GA6747@x200.localdomain> <20081129234907.GA2340@kroah.com> <20081201101245.0a2f3123.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <1228158811.3196.88.camel@calx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1228158811.3196.88.camel@calx> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matt Mackall Cc: randy.dunlap-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, greg-U8xfFu+wG4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, adobriyan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, remi.colinet-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:13:31 -0600 Matt Mackall wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:12 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:49:07 -0800 Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 12:42:07AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 06:44:49PM +0100, Remi Colinet wrote: > > > > > This patch add a new /proc/mempool file in order to display mempool usage. > > > > > > > > > > The feature can be disabled with CONFIG_PROC_MEMPOOL=N during kernel > > > > > configuration. > > > > > > > > We're NOT adding config option per proc file. > > > > > > > > And can we, please, freeze /proc for not per-process stuff and open debugfs > > > > for random stuff, please? > > > > > > debugfs has been open for random stuff since the day it was added to the > > > tree :) > > > > > > Feel free to put this kind of thing there instead of proc. > > > > Do distros ship with debugfs enabled? > > The problem with using debugfs is that it is very optional IMO. > > The problem with debugfs is that it claims to not be an ABI but it is > lying. Distributions ship tools that depend on portions of debugfs. And > they also ship debugfs in their kernel. So it is effectively the same > as /proc, except with the 1.0-era everything-goes attitude rather than > the 2.6-era we-should-really-think-about-this one. > > Pushing stuff from procfs to debugfs is thus just setting us up for pain > down the road. Don't do it. In five years, we'll discover we can't turn > debugfs off or even clean it up because too much relies on it. > > If you think that debugfs is NOT an ABI, then I'm sure you'll be happy > to ack my patch entitled 'gratuitously break usbmon to remind folks that > debugfs is not an ABI'. ^^ yup. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html