System Software Meeting Minutes, 2006-12-26

[Jonathan Corbet]

Mitch Bradley <wmb at firmworks.com> wrote:

> The proc code is quite simple and straightforward, whereas i quickly fell
> into a snakepit of interrelated structs when I tried to grok sysfs.  And
> the text representation requirement is a problem because OFW device tree
> properties have specific serialization rules that include binary data in
> many cases.
> 
> The API for /proc is just fine.  I wonder if we could essentially clone it
> (or even reuse most of the functions verbatim), but mount it on /ofw .

Yes, sysfs can be a bit challenging to get a handle on.  

A /proc-like glue layer for a virtual filesystem wouldn't go over very
well, but adapting the current /proc code into their filesystem
equivalents should be a fairly straightforward task.  

jon