Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs

From: Stephen C. Tweedie (sct@redhat.com)
Date: Mon Apr 10 2000 - 04:02:33 EST

Next message: Graham Stoney: "PATCH: requesting feedback on dead function optimisation"
Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: >64MB RAM problems, why?"
In reply to: jmcmullan@linuxcare.com: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
Next in thread: Jamie Lokier: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi,

On Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 04:59:30AM +0000, jmcmullan@linuxcare.com wrote:
>
> Why not (assuming we have a string based sysctl_s()) assign
> the MIB numbers to strings? Ie, a MIB <-> sysctl_s() database like:

> 1.2.3.4.1 /kernel/vm/free_pages
> 1.2.3.4.2 /kernel/vm/swap_max

The sysctl() syscall _already_ uses integer vectors like "1.2.3.4.1".
We already have this.

--Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Graham Stoney: "PATCH: requesting feedback on dead function optimisation"
Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: >64MB RAM problems, why?"
In reply to: jmcmullan@linuxcare.com: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
Next in thread: Jamie Lokier: "Re: Suggested dual human/binary interface for proc/devfs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:13 EST