Re: [PATCH] sysctl: add support for poll()

[Kay Sievers]

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 04:17, Lucas De Marchi
<lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 15:16 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 00:17, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> > We already have several pollable procfs files, such as
>>> > fs/proc/base.c:mounts_poll() and I think drivers/md has one. ÂI do
>>> > think that any work in this area should end up with those custom
>>> > make-procfs-pollable hacks being identified and removed.
>>>
>>> For these files we can probably move the event counter into the
>>> seq_file structure, and get rid of the dance to kmalloc it and assign
>>> it to seq_file->private. That might simplify the logic a bit.
>>>
>>> [Adding Neil, to get his opinion of moving 'event' so seq_file and get
>>> rid of the malloc dance]
>>
>> I guess, we could do something like this, which looks quite a bit
>> simpler by moving the poll event counter into the dynamically allocated
>> seq_file structure itself, instead of having private structures
>> allocated on top to just carry the counter (patch is just
>> compile-tested).
>
> Now that this cleanup made its way, could we look again to to the
> pollable sysctl implementation?

Can we please get support for poll() for /proc/sys files merged? Just
like we do that for /proc already.

We like to have notifications triggered by the kernel for selected
files in /proc/sys.

I don't really see any technical reasons to hold this back.

Thanks,
Kay
--
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/