Messages in this thread | | | From | Andries.Brouwer@cwi ... | Date | Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:38:41 GMT | Subject | Re: [PATCH][CFT] IDE TCQ #2 |
| |
> In my opinion sysctl() is worthless. It uses an array of numbers > where ioctl() uses a single number. Especially since the names are > already in the kernel it is much clearer and cleaner to use a > pathname. I wouldn't mind if sysctl() disappeared entirely.
Please have a look at /proc/sys/ OK?
> Also ioctl() has its problems. First of all, nobody knows what the > prototype is. Secondly, it is too rigid - the moment one needs a > larger structure one needs a different ioctl. > > A text based interface is much more flexible. If the number of > cylinders of a disk no longer fits in a short, well doesn't matter, > then the number of digits may increase but the interface remains > unchanged. Of course the price is that one has to parse, but > typically that is not a problem.
What do you want me to see in /proc/sys/? Pathnames? That is what I like. I dislike the system call, with its ugly numbers.
Andries
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |