[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120906135110.6dadb023@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:51:10 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, bp@...64.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
ananth@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [mcelog] Start using the new sysfs tunables location
On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 18:04:27 +0530
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 09/06/2012 05:58 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> The change is still under discussion. Stage one is to add the new global
> >> pathnames in addition to keeping the old per-cpu ones. Also fix all utilities
> >> (just mcelog(8) as far as we know) to prefer the new paths.
> >
> > But why do you even want to change it? Does it fix anything?
> > AFAIK the old setup -- while not being pretty -- works just fine.
>
> The reason for this was explained in this thread:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg298302.html
>
> Even if we decide not to remove these tunables from under their current
> per-cpu location, I still think it is much cleaner to have them
> available under /sys/devices/system/machinecheck.
That to me seems a ridiculous proposal. What are you going to do if in
future they ceased to be system wide ? Move them back ?
The threshold for playing musical chairs with sysfs nodes is a lot higher
than "I think it's much cleaner"
The current approach is a lot more futureproof even if a spot more ugly.
Alan
--
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