On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 13:21 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > On 10/2/07, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 12:31 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > > > What would be the point in another top-level tree for device > > > information? All devices you are exporting information for, are > > > already in the sysfs tree, right? > > > > Never did find NFS mounts/servers/superblocks or whatever constitutes a > > BDI for NFS in there. Same goes for all other networked filesystems for > > that matter. > > How about adding this information to the tree then, instead of > creating a new top-level hack, just because something that you think > you need doesn't exist.
So you suggest adding all the various network filesystems in there (where?), and adding the concept of a BDI, and ensuring all are properly linked together - somehow. Feel free to do so. > You called sysfs a mess, seems you work on that topic too. :) I called the in-kernel API to create sysfs files a mess. Not that I have another opinion on the content of /sys though, always takes to damn long to find anything in there. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
