Re: [PATCH 58/59] sysctl: Reimplement the sysctl proc support

[Ingo Molnar]

* Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> However it has always been a bug for anything under /proc/sys to not 
> be a sysctl. It's not subtle breakage but subtle enforcement of the 
> existing rules.

it wasnt really a bug but an uncleanliness - but yeah. The way i used it 
is pretty much equivalent to a CTL_UNNUMBERED entry.

> [...]  It may be worth adding a test to create_proc_entry that says 
> "you silly person you need to use sysctls to create an entry under 
> /proc/sys"

yep, agreed - without the "silly person" bit ;-) It was a whole lot 
simpler in code to just add in a simple proc entry than a full sysctl 
table that i used for nothing. (because the sysctl wasnt really 
syscall-settable)

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