[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 08:57 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 20:58 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). I can't have a required part of my driver depend on a feature that's not enabled in the major distro kernels. sucks to be you, however I think it's equally or even more unacceptable to cripple the main kernel because you want to also support antique kernels (those more than 12 months old). What antique kernels? It's not enabled in the latest SLES beta (2.6.16-git6 or so), or in Fedora rawhide (also 2.6.16-git). They mightn't be exactly today's kernels, but they're no more than two or three weeks old. CONFIG_DEBUG_FS has been in the kernel for a long time, and it's still not being picked up. The general rule is if you want to support that, do it outside the kernel.org tree. Which that are you referring to? b -- Bryan O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Re: [openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
At 11:58 PM 3/9/2006, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: I'd like a mechanism that is (a) always there (b) easy for kernel to use and (c) easy for userspace to use. A sysfs file satisfies a, b, and c, but I can't use it; a sysfs bin file satisfies all three (a bit worse on b), but I can't use it; debugfs isn't there, so I can't use it. That leaves me with few options, I think. What do you suggest? (Please don't say netlink.) mmap()? Tom. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 05:51 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 08:57 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 20:58 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). I can't have a required part of my driver depend on a feature that's not enabled in the major distro kernels. sucks to be you, however I think it's equally or even more unacceptable to cripple the main kernel because you want to also support antique kernels (those more than 12 months old). What antique kernels? It's not enabled in the latest SLES beta (2.6.16-git6 or so), or in Fedora rawhide (also 2.6.16-git). They mightn't be exactly today's kernels, but they're no more than two or three weeks old. CONFIG_DEBUG_FS has been in the kernel for a long time, and it's still not being picked up. but it's a module; you can ship it no problem yourself if you go through the hell of shipping external modules The general rule is if you want to support that, do it outside the kernel.org tree. Which that are you referring to? supporting really ancient kernels ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 10:34:01PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:58:13PM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). Well, I can do something about SuSE, it's up to someone else to persuade Red Hat :) It's been built into Fedora kernels since it was merged upstream. It isn't in RHEL4, as it wasn't around back in 2.6.9, and unless there's a really compelling argument for it, I doubt it'll be backported. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 15:06 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: They mightn't be exactly today's kernels, but they're no more than two or three weeks old. CONFIG_DEBUG_FS has been in the kernel for a long time, and it's still not being picked up. but it's a module; you can ship it no problem yourself if you go through the hell of shipping external modules Yes, we can ship it ourselves. But a significant point of this exercise is to have the drivers be available to people who use unmodified distros, and don't want to download other bits to do so. If Greg can get SUSE to turn on debugfs, that's great. I can ask Dave Jones or Doug Ledford or some other Fedora/RedHat kernel person to do likewise, but they're not beholden to me in any way, so god knows what my chances are :-) The have it just work in vendor distros notion is also why the OpenIB community as a whole is focusing on rolling out a 1.0 release of the IB userspace code, so that people can expect their distros to simply work with Infiniband hardware. b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 05:51:41AM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: What antique kernels? It's not enabled in the latest SLES beta (2.6.16-git6 or so), or in Fedora rawhide (also 2.6.16-git). Bzzzrrt. (10:54:01:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~)$ uname -r 2.6.15-1.2027_FC5 (10:54:04:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~)$ grep debug /proc/filesystems nodev debugfs Been there since it was merged upstream. It's not mounted anywhere by default, as imo, it shouldn't be. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 07:55 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 15:06 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: They mightn't be exactly today's kernels, but they're no more than two or three weeks old. CONFIG_DEBUG_FS has been in the kernel for a long time, and it's still not being picked up. but it's a module; you can ship it no problem yourself if you go through the hell of shipping external modules Yes, we can ship it ourselves. But a significant point of this exercise is to have the drivers be available to people who use unmodified distros, and don't want to download other bits to do so. well shipping one .ko or two .ko's... same difference. Or maybe in your case it's a 4-5 transition. No Difference from a user point of view. So sorry I'm not buying your argument very much. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 11:25 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: What more exactly do you want? Nothing. The reason I said it wasn't enabled was that I tried mounting it, but evidently I fubmled something. Thanks, b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 17:24 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: well shipping one .ko or two .ko's... same difference. Or maybe in your case it's a 4-5 transition. No Difference from a user point of view. I think you misunderstand. The goal is for *us* to ship *none* :-) Anyway, I think we have a few different possible workable solutions that are not netlink, so I'm happy. b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 08:36 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 17:24 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: well shipping one .ko or two .ko's... same difference. Or maybe in your case it's a 4-5 transition. No Difference from a user point of view. I think you misunderstand. The goal is for *us* to ship *none* :-) then it gets easier.. KConfig lets you select debugfs. Done. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 11:25:52AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 07:55:21AM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: If Greg can get SUSE to turn on debugfs, that's great. I can ask Dave Jones or Doug Ledford or some other Fedora/RedHat kernel person to do likewise, but they're not beholden to me in any way, so god knows what my chances are :-) I've acknowledged it was already enabled. And I just looked at the SuSE kernel, and it is already enabled too. So it looks like Bryan didn't even check either distro before saying it wasn't there :( thanks, greg k-h ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 08:48 -0800, Greg KH wrote: And I just looked at the SuSE kernel, and it is already enabled too. So it looks like Bryan didn't even check either distro before saying it wasn't there :( No, I checked both, but it was late at night and I fumbled my mount command line in each case. Sigh. b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 16:35 -0800, Greg KH wrote: Grumble? Oh come on, don't export binary structures through sysfs, it's in the DOCUMENTATION THAT SYSFS IS FOR TEXT FILES ONLY OK, fine. If you don't want to export a text file, then use something else other than sysfs, it's that simple. Use what? Would a sysfs relay file, or whatever they're called now that relayfs is moving into sysfs, do the trick? If so, what's a good place to pull those patches from so I can compile-test my changes? Should I just grub through my archives and apply whatever Paul Mundt sent out a few weeks ago? sysfs binary files are for PASS-THROUGH things ONLY! If there's any documentation on what sysfs binary files are for, I haven't seen it. It's not in the include files, the source, or Documentation/filesystems. Ok, here's a new rule to help this from happening again in the future: If you want to add a new sysfs file to the kernel, it MUST be accompanied with full documentation that explains exactly what that file contains and what it is for. No exceptions will be allowed. I'm fine with this rule, but accompanied how? In a comment in the code? In the patch description? In the same way that sysfs binary files are documented? :-) Also, I'd suggest that you put a similar requirement on directories and symlinks, if you're going to clamp down on files. b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 04:46:29PM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 16:35 -0800, Greg KH wrote: Grumble? Oh come on, don't export binary structures through sysfs, it's in the DOCUMENTATION THAT SYSFS IS FOR TEXT FILES ONLY OK, fine. If you don't want to export a text file, then use something else other than sysfs, it's that simple. Use what? Would a sysfs relay file, or whatever they're called now that relayfs is moving into sysfs, do the trick? If so, what's a good place to pull those patches from so I can compile-test my changes? Should I just grub through my archives and apply whatever Paul Mundt sent out a few weeks ago? They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. But I think he's still working on them. What's wrong with debugfs? sysfs binary files are for PASS-THROUGH things ONLY! If there's any documentation on what sysfs binary files are for, I haven't seen it. It's not in the include files, the source, or Documentation/filesystems. Fair enough, you are correct. There is a serious dearth of sysfs and kobject documentation lately, I'll work on fixing that up. Ok, here's a new rule to help this from happening again in the future: If you want to add a new sysfs file to the kernel, it MUST be accompanied with full documentation that explains exactly what that file contains and what it is for. No exceptions will be allowed. I'm fine with this rule, but accompanied how? In a comment in the code? In the patch description? In the same way that sysfs binary files are documented? :-) Touche :) I referred to my prior lkml post: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/383717 which provides a structure for documenting the user-kernel API, which is what you are creating here. Also, I'd suggest that you put a similar requirement on directories and symlinks, if you're going to clamp down on files. I completly agree, anything that is in sysfs falls under this requirement. Sorry, but I think of directories and symlinks as files, as I've been spelunking through the vfs layer too many times :) thanks, greg k-h ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). I can't have a required part of my driver depend on a feature that's not enabled in the major distro kernels. I'd like a mechanism that is (a) always there (b) easy for kernel to use and (c) easy for userspace to use. A sysfs file satisfies a, b, and c, but I can't use it; a sysfs bin file satisfies all three (a bit worse on b), but I can't use it; debugfs isn't there, so I can't use it. That leaves me with few options, I think. What do you suggest? (Please don't say netlink.) b ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:58:13PM -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). Well, I can do something about SuSE, it's up to someone else to persuade Red Hat :) I can't have a required part of my driver depend on a feature that's not enabled in the major distro kernels. Fair enough. I'd like a mechanism that is (a) always there (b) easy for kernel to use and (c) easy for userspace to use. A sysfs file satisfies a, b, and c, but I can't use it; a sysfs bin file satisfies all three (a bit worse on b), but I can't use it; debugfs isn't there, so I can't use it. That leaves me with few options, I think. What do you suggest? (Please don't say netlink.) Write your own filesystem? Seriously, you do that and you get to set all of your own rules (well, within reason). It's only 200 lines of code, max. thanks, greg k-h ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Re: Revenge of the sysfs maintainer! (was Re: [PATCH 8 of 20] ipath - sysfs support for core driver)
On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 20:58 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:00 -0800, Greg KH wrote: They are in the latest -mm tree if you wish to use them. Unfortunatly it might look like they will not work out, due to the per-cpu relay files not working properly with Paul's patches at the moment. Hmm, OK. What's wrong with debugfs? It's not configured into the kernels of either of the distros I use (Red Hat or SUSE). I can't have a required part of my driver depend on a feature that's not enabled in the major distro kernels. sucks to be you, however I think it's equally or even more unacceptable to cripple the main kernel because you want to also support antique kernels (those more than 12 months old). The general rule is if you want to support that, do it outside the kernel.org tree. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
