Re: [PATCH] 2.5 PROPOSAL: Replacement for current /proc of shit.

Gábor Lénárt
2001-11-01T17:06:34Z

On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 05:42:36AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > proc(KBUILD_OBJECT, "foo", my_foo, int, 0644);
> >
> > And with my previous parameter patch:
> > PARAM(foo, int, 0444);
>
> Is this designed to replace sysctl?
>
> In general we want to support using sysctl and similar features WITHOUT
> procfs support at all (of any type). Nice for embedded systems
> especially.

Agreed. It would be nice to have always 1:1 relation between sysctl and
procfs interface, so you can do EVERYTHING with both of sysctl and via
/proc ... Maybe the code should be partly common as much as possible as well.

- Gabor