[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1274197570.17463.30.camel@nimitz>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 08:46:10 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@...el.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, haicheng.li@...ux.intel.com,
shaohui.zheng@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC, 6/7] NUMA hotplug emulator
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 10:55 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I liked Dave's earlier proposal to do a command line parameter like interface
> for "probe". Perhaps that can be done. It shouldn't need a lot of code.
After looking at the code, configfs doesn't look to me like it can be
done horribly easily. It takes a least a subsystem and then a few
structures to get things up and running. There also doesn't appear to
be a good subsystem to plug into.
> In fact there are already two different parser libraries for this:
> lib/parser.c and lib/params.c. One could chose the one that one likes
> better :-)
Agreed. But, I do see why Greg is suggesting configfs here.
Superficially, it seems like a good configfs fit, but I think configfs
is only a good fit when you need to cram a _bunch_ of stuff into a _new_
interface. Here, we have a relatively tiny amount of data that has half
of what it needs from an existing interface.
-- Dave
--
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