On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> or if sysfs/kobjects should be scrapped and rewritten, do you have any
> insight into what kind of abstraction could/should replace it? Should we
> go back to procfs and get rid of kobjects altogether? (as it's slowly
> turning into a /proc problem of itself, with worse compatibility and
> sneakier bugs.)
>
The few times I've used kobjects/sysfs, I would always need to "relearn"
how to use it. It's not trivial at all, and even when I finally get it
working, I'm not sure it's working correctly.
Although something like debugfs took me a few minutes to use. Now when
ever I need to do something that userspace uses, I simply choose debugfs.
I thought the switch to sysfs was to keep procfs cleaner and only used for
processes. Why did it need something so complex as the kobject structure?
Was it so that udev could integrate with it? If sysfs was as simple as
debugfs, I think a lot of these bugs would not have occurred.
-- Steve
--
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]
