linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 1/4] procfs: Introduce socinfo under /proc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 11 May 2010 07:21:31 +0100
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Cc:	Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@...ia.com>,
	ext Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	"De-Schrijver Peter (Nokia-D/Helsinki)" 
	<Peter.De-Schrijver@...ia.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ambresh <a0393775@...com>,
	ext Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	"santosh.shilimkar@...com" <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Balbi Felipe (Nokia-D/Helsinki)" <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/4] procfs: Introduce socinfo under /proc

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:14:47PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 03:55:49PM +0300, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 02:39:02PM +0200, ext Paul Mundt wrote:
> > > Note that in the cpuinfo case there is often special handling for the
> > > single (or boot CPU) case, such as printing out a descriptor for the
> > > machine type and so on. You might be better off just extending cpuinfo
> > > rather than introducing another /proc abstraction, presumably your
> > > socinfo string will be fixed regardless of whether it's SMP or not.
> > 
> > Yeah, I wouldn't expect it to change if it SMP or not. It should be fixed.
> > Previous version of this change was actually extending ARM cpuinfo. The previous
> > thread starts here:
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=127304890312365&w=2
> > 
> > But, the point of moving that to specific file was that soc info is not really cpu info.
> > 
> It's up to you of course, but adding an extra file because of SoC/CPU
> ambiguity seems pretty ugly. Almost all architectures already include
> machine type descriptors in their cpuinfo output (as ARM does also) and
> if you can justify that then certainly adding in some SoC-specific bits
> isn't exactly much of a stretch.
> 
> These days you should have a pretty strong justification for adding new
> procfs files, and this is certainly not one of them.

I disagree.
--
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/