From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262079AbULQRVk (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2004 12:21:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262080AbULQRVk (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2004 12:21:40 -0500 Received: from ctb-mesg5.saix.net ([196.25.240.77]:5866 "EHLO ctb-mesg5.saix.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262079AbULQRVS (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2004 12:21:18 -0500 Subject: Re: debugfs in the namespace [u] From: "Martin Schlemmer [c]" Reply-To: Martin Schlemmer To: Greg KH Cc: Mike Waychison , Pete Zaitcev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20041216221843.GA10172@kroah.com> References: <20041216110002.3e0ddf52@lembas.zaitcev.lan> <20041216190835.GE5654@kroah.com> <41C20356.4010900@sun.com> <20041216221843.GA10172@kroah.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-nTZAPUFm6gmZiWF+EF7U" Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 19:22:02 +0200 Message-Id: <1103304122.12935.6.camel@nosferatu.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-nTZAPUFm6gmZiWF+EF7U Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 14:18 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 04:51:18PM -0500, Mike Waychison wrote: > > I thought debugfs was meant for just debugging. As there is no plans > > for standardizing its namespace, why are we allowing ourselves to rely > > on it being mounted at all? > >=20 > > AFAICT, there should be no excuse for userspace to actually rely on any > > of the data within debugfs. Otherwise we end up with yet another > > filesystem whose role is: Chaotic hodgepodge of magic files created by > > drivers that couldn't bother to be well-organized. > >=20 > > Please, let's not make debugfs part of userspace. Keep it for what it > > is, debugging purposes only. >=20 > I'm not saying we will ever make it "required" at all. It's just that > people are going to want to mount the thing, and are already asking me > where we should mount it at. If you pick a different place than me, > fine, I don't mind. It's the user who is asked to report some info that > happens to be in debugfs that is going to want to know where to put it, > as they have no idea even what it is. Distros are going to ask what to > put in their fstabs for where to mount the thing too. >=20 > So, let's pick a place and be done with it. >=20 > I like /dbg (3 characters total to get to, which is shorter than /debug > which takes at least 4, 3 chars and a tab). Pete likes /debug. Jan > Engelhardt want to hide the thing from people at /.debugfs. >=20 > Hm, what about /.debug ? That's a compromise that I can live with (even > less key strokes to get to...) >=20 > Or is their some restriction on putting hidden directories in the root > filesystem as specified by the LSB? >=20 > So, /.debug sound acceptable? >=20 Prob silly, but what about /sys/dbg ? Out of sight ... --=20 Martin Schlemmer --=-nTZAPUFm6gmZiWF+EF7U Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBwxW6qburzKaJYLYRAroyAJ4hM3w40nXUvLe2prAZ0o18+vV8mgCfYQEY wOSVaBWDfbbr0ryUU1KtUo8= =owaZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-nTZAPUFm6gmZiWF+EF7U--