Re: debugfs in the namespace

From: Grzegorz Kulewski
Date: Thu Dec 16 2004 - 18:40:54 EST

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Greg KH wrote:

On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 02:45:31PM -0800, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:18:43 -0800, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hm, what about /.debug ? That's a compromise that I can live with (even
less key strokes to get to...)

No way, Jan is out of his mind, adding obfuscations like that. Anything
but that. I didn't even bother to reply, because it never occurred to me
that you'd fall for something so retarded.

Bah, fine :)

Otherwise, /dbg sounds good.

Ok, I can live with that.

I agree that anything like /.* is broken and strange... But this is only my little opinion. :-)

But why creating dir in /proc - like /proc/debug is bad? Its advantages:
- it does not pollute namespace,
- it can be created by kernel at startup even on systems where debugfs will not be used (why not?),
- /proc is mounted in all configurations and often it is the first thing that startscripts do,
- if somebody really needs to debug proc using debugfs he can always mount it as /debug temporaily.


Grzegorz Kulewski

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at