[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240213174733.086b2e3e@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 17:47:33 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, "Darrick J. Wong"
<djwong@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,
mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net,
willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, corbet@....net,
void@...ifault.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com, david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org,
dennis@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev, rppt@...nel.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com,
yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com,
andreyknvl@...il.com, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, vvvvvv@...gle.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com, bsegall@...gle.com,
bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com,
elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
songmuchun@...edance.com, jbaron@...mai.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/35] lib: add allocation tagging support for memory
allocation profiling
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 14:38:16 -0800
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > > Save yourself a cycle of "rework the whole fs interface only to have
> > > someone else tell you no" and put it in debugfs, not sysfs. Wrangling
> > > with debugfs is easier than all the macro-happy sysfs stuff; you don't
> > > have to integrate with the "device" model; and there is no 'one value
> > > per file' rule.
> >
> > Thanks for the input. This file used to be in debugfs but reviewers
> > felt it belonged in /proc if it's to be used in production
> > environments. Some distros (like Android) disable debugfs in
> > production.
>
> FWIW, I agree debugfs is not right. If others feel it's right in /proc,
> I certainly won't NAK -- it's just been that we've traditionally been
> trying to avoid continuing to pollute the top-level /proc and instead
> associate new things with something in /sys.
You can create your own file system, but I would suggest using kernfs for it ;-)
If you look in /sys/kernel/ you'll see a bunch of kernel file systems already there:
~# mount |grep kernel
securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
tracefs on /sys/kernel/tracing type tracefs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
configfs on /sys/kernel/config type configfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists