Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 06:55:43PM +0300, Moni Shoua wrote: > >> I believe that Jason and I still disagree but... > >> Jason suggests that I implement this feature with netlink. This >> approach might have an advantage but if I understand it right this >> approach requires a patch also to some user application in order to >> take advantage of this patch. > > The kernel devs have made it clear that the preferred way to export > this information is through netlink and/or a file in /proc/net/.. > > You never got an answer if /proc/net is truely discouraged or not. As I remember I got opinions against /proc/net. I'm willing to move the virtual files to there if this is acceptable by all. Otherwise I will find myself in the same situation.
Roland, Sean - what do you think? > > debugfs is completely useless because it cannot be used for actual > end-user interrogation and the rules are it should not be used as a > stable kernel-user interface. (ie is NOT a new dumping ground like > /proc/ was) > I don't know about that. The only fault of debugfs that I'm aware of is that distros don't mount it by default >> Also, I think that there is a value for a virtual text file under >> debugfs to monitor rdma_cm connections easily and without any other >> special app besides 'cat' (just like in IPoIB). > > If you have the netlink based program there really is no point in > including something under debugfs. It is just bloat. > >> Finally, this implementation doesn't contradict netlink >> implementation in the future (and it won't be the first time). > > As I said before, the stack has reached a level of maturity that new > stuff going in should meaningfully 'move the ball forward' toward a > mature and complete stack. In the context of state reporting that > means a stable user interface that programs like lsof, netstat, etc, > can rely upon. > > Putting something under debugfs clearly does nothing to advance that > goal. > > Further, there is clearly alot of state information we should be > exporting to userspace. RDMA-CM stuff is only a tiny portion. netlink > is the kernel devs answer to all of this. > I just want to emphasize that my goal for now is to supply a simple way to monitor rdma_cm connections, nothing more and nothing less. I don't want it to depend on special userspace application and in fact, I just want to add a capability like we have in many other modules. This is a feature that we always get request for from customers and developers. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
