From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 04:47:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 04:47:18 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:9863 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 04:47:17 -0400 Message-ID: <3D5CBCFC.2090006@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 01:51:08 -0700 From: Dave Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020513 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: [PATCH] add buddyinfo /proc entry References: <3D5C6410.1020706@us.ibm.com> <20020816043140.GA2478@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 07:31:44PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > >> Not _another_ proc entry! > > Yes, not another one. Why not move these to driverfs, where they > belong. Could you show us how this particular situation might be laid out in a driverfs/kfs/gregfs tree? It's great that you keep suggesting this, but we have another chicken-and-egg problem. The problem with driverfs today is that it isn't worth it for _me_ to use it to just get this one, single thing. If I used driverfs right now, the only thing that I would get out of it would be ... buddyinfo! How is it worth my while to use it on a shared machine where most people probably won't be mounting driverfs, or _want_ it mounted as the default? > (ignore the driverfs name, it should be called kfs, or some such > thing, as stuff more than driver info should go there, just like > these entries.) If even its most ardent supporters don't like its name... -- Dave Hansen haveblue@us.ibm.com