On Jul 10, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Richard Lowe wrote:

> Alexander Kolbasov <akolb at eng.sun.com> writes:
>
>> Richard Lowe <richlowe at richlowe.net> wrote:
> .....many sage observations from both elided...

> Ah, it was using a web of symlinks to cross branches that I was  
> missing.
>
>> I do not quite see how kstats can be used to represent trees.   
>> What do
>> you have in mind here?
>
> I think what I had in mind falls apart for PGs.
> My expectation was that the basic method used now to represented  
> core/chip
> relationships could be expanded upon, but I don't think that holds up
> to even moderately complex topologies.

Is the desire to leverage kstat primarily a desire to NOT have two  
different mechanisms?

If so, and if there becomes consensus that the pseudo filesystem is  
most appropriate (due to it's flexibility) wouldn't an obvious  
unification be to re-implement kstat  to use the pseudo filesystem in  
lieu of it's current APIs for backwards compatibility ... while  
providing unification?



Keith H. Bierman    keith.bierman at Sun.COM   |  khbkhb at gmail.com
Sun Microsystems Microelectronics Group     | sun IM: khb AIM: kbiermank
5430 Nassau Circle East                     | 650-352-4432 voice+fax
Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113              | sun internal 68207
http://blogs.sun.com/khb                    | 303-997-2749
<speaking for myself, not Sun*> Copyright 2007







Reply via email to