From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261549AbULIQ40 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:56:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261560AbULIQzh (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:55:37 -0500 Received: from Mail.MNSU.EDU ([134.29.1.12]:59372 "EHLO mail.mnsu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261551AbULIQxq (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:53:46 -0500 Message-ID: <41B88319.9070207@mnsu.edu> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 10:53:45 -0600 From: "Jeffrey E. Hundstad" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a5) Gecko/20041121 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robin Holt CC: Limin Gu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] jobfs - new virtual filesystem for job kernel/user interface References: <200412082203.iB8M3Lk22375@dbear.engr.sgi.com> <20041209140504.GD5187@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20041209140504.GD5187@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I'd have to second Robin's sentiments. IMHO there should be a very strong reason to have this type of information in a new filesystem as this type of proliferation is counterproductive. -- jeffrey hundstad Robin Holt wrote: >On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 02:03:21PM -0800, Limin Gu wrote: > > >>Hello, >> >>I am looking for your comments on the attached draft, it is the job patch >>for 2.6.9. I have posted job patch for older kernel before, but in this patch >>I have replaced the /proc/job binary ioctl calls with a new small virtual >>filesystem (jobfs). >> >>Job uses the hook provided by PAGG (Process Aggregates). A job is a group >>related processes all descended from a point of entry process and identified >>by a unique job identifier (jid). You can find the general information >>about PAGG and Job at http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/ >> >>I will very much appreciate your comments, suggestions and criticisms >>on this new filesystem design and implementation as the job kernel/user >>communication interface. The patch is still a draft. >> >>Thank you! >> >> > >I maintain my position that this belongs in /proc. > >Why not have a structure something like: > >/proc//job -> ../jobs/ >/proc/jobs// -> ../../ > >What other information is really necessary from userland? > > >