Re: [PATCH] sysctl: Undeprecate sys_sysctl (take 2)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Andi Kleen <[email protected]> writes:

On Wednesday 08 November 2006 20:58, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
The basic issue is that despite have been ``deprecated'' and
warned about as a very bad thing in the man pages since it's
inception there are a few real users of sys_sysctl.
But they only seem to use a small number of actually used with
sysctl(2) sysctls.
I still think just maintaining a conversion table for those is the right thing to do.

I don't know.  Every distinct user of the binary sysctl interface
used a different entry.  So the fact that there are a small number of
programs and thus a small number of sysctls used I agree with.  I do
not agree with the conclusion that we can predict the set of binary
sysctl that are in use.  We do not get good enough feedback from
the user community.

I don't have a problem with the principle of a conversion table
if it meant that we would never add any additional binary sysctls.


Okay, my opinion now...

I think we should change the sysctl system so most sysctls simply aren't accessible through the binary interface. The rest of them should be documented in one place, preferrably machine-readable.

However, I think having the binary sysctls available as a limited last resort is better than adding ad hoc system calls all over the place, like sys_mips.

	-hpa

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux