Re: debugfs in the namespace

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 02:45:31PM -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:18:43 -0800, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hm, what about /.debug ?  That's a compromise that I can live with (even
> > less key strokes to get to...)
> 
> No way, Jan is out of his mind, adding obfuscations like that. Anything
> but that. I didn't even bother to reply, because it never occurred to me
> that you'd fall for something so retarded.

Bah, fine :)

> Otherwise, /dbg sounds good.

Ok, I can live with that.

> Mike's objections sound philosophically congenial to me. What I'm trying
> to have here is to support an equivalent of tcpdump, which some may consider
> a core function rather than a debugging function. Of course, I could easily
> say "this is for debugging only" and thus deflect Mike, but this is not
> about winning, and actually I have no investment in any approach. For me the
> /sys is obviously out because of the "one file one value" doctrine. The /proc
> sounds attractive, but programming procfs is such a bother. If we had a debugfs
> style API to procfs, that would be the winner from the standpoint of this
> application. Failing that, I guess, it's /dbg.

Yes, usb data dumping could go in /dbg, it makes sense.

thanks,

greg k-h