From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 4 15:04:09 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19389 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:04:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (daemon@smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA19240; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:03:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA06292; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:03:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpd006161; Thu Jun 4 15:03:16 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA14257; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:02:51 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199806042202.PAA14257@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: kernfs/procfs questions... To: mns@pobox.com (Mark Shepard) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 22:02:50 +0000 (GMT) Cc: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, mike@smith.net.au, jonny@jonny.eng.br, mike@dingo.cdrom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199806041951.MAB17978@proxy4.ba.best.com> from "Mark Shepard" at Jun 4, 98 12:49:14 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > procfs/kernfs is essentially a kernel API in disguise. Considered as an > API, sysctl seems "cleaner" and lighter-weight than procfs/kernfs -- > there's no need to format/parse ASCII, no need to generate column headers, > and FreeBSD's sysctl provides data in a more uniform format than Linux's > procfs. The main issue I take with this is that "ps, w, who, and netstat break when kernel structures change". It may be correct to point at sysctl and say "yea, verily, this is light weight", but to paraphrase Eddie Murphy, what has it done for me lately? I have a *real* problem with the externalization of kernel structures as API. One camp wants the features left alone because they don't want to roll the code into kgdb ("crash"). Another wants the /dev/kmem dependence taken out, come hell or high water, and screw the ability to ps system dumps. I don't think either camp is right (of course 8-)), and would prefer binding an absracted interface to the kernel object file, and requiring the use of ELF section tags, but I am a minority of one. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message