Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm take5 6/7] add ioctls for adding/removing target

[Keiichi KII]

Hello Satyam,

> Hmm, I might've missed this thread, but my opinion on the
> alternatives, fwiw:
>
> 1. I think adding new ioctl's to the kernel are generally disliked for
> obvious reasons. Perhaps Stephen meant to add some generic
> ioctl's above (and not separate ones specially implemented for
> the dynamically reconfigurable netconsole driver)?

You're right.
At first, I implemented ioctls to misc device because of using misc sysfs.
But, Andrew Morton said "Using an ioctl() against a miscdev is rather 
untypical for networking.". So, I implemented ioclts to tty_driver.

> Please do consider configfs. Note that we'll have to lose the sysfs
> symlink from your target's kobject to the kobject of the ethernet
> device if we switch to configfs, but was that symlink needed for
> some essential functionality or was it simply for informational
> purpose? IMHO, this patchset only needs to bring in functionality
> to be able to create, destroy, and modify netconsole targets at
> run-time, and all these reconfiguration tasks would be handled
> quite well by configfs, AFAICT.

It was for informational pupose. But, if we used symlink to the net_device 
kobject in sysfs, we could easily keep up with changing network device name by 
changing symbolic link.
In the case of configfs, Do we use config_item related to the network interface 
because the configfs doesn't have symlink that refers to net_device kobject
(e.g. "network_interface" in configfs, "network_interface" value is "eth0")?

I'm going to search configfs and modify interface to configfs.

Thanks
--
Keiichi KII
NEC Corporation OSS Platform Development Division
E-mail: k-keiichi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

-
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/