[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070314122453.GA5775@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:24:53 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 58/59] sysctl: Reimplement the sysctl proc support
* Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
> On 3/14/07, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > #define PROCNAME_PML "sys/kernel/preempt_max_latency"
> >
> > static __init int latency_fs_init(void)
> > {
> > struct proc_dir_entry *entry;
> >
> > if (!(entry = create_proc_entry(PROCNAME_PML, 0644, NULL)))
> > printk("latency_fs_init(): can't create %s\n",
> >PROCNAME_PML);
> >
> > with your change that broke because beyond /proc/sys/ there are no
> > real proc entries anymore, there's no de->subdir directory for
> > xlate_proc_name() to find. While the latency tracer isnt upstream,
> > this change in semantics does not seem to be intended (the changelog
> > is certainly silent about it).
>
> Use register_sysctl_table() for sysctls.
yes - i just wanted to point out the incompatibility and subtle breakage
that this change caused. I'll now have to convert the current code over
to sysctl_table, which isnt that hard but not trivial either, and i
certainly could make use that time for other purposes.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists