On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 14:38:16 -0800 Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Save yourself a cycle of "rework the whole fs interface only to have > > > someone else tell you no" and put it in debugfs, not sysfs. Wrangling > > > with debugfs is easier than all the macro-happy sysfs stuff; you don't > > > have to integrate with the "device" model; and there is no 'one value > > > per file' rule. > > > > Thanks for the input. This file used to be in debugfs but reviewers > > felt it belonged in /proc if it's to be used in production > > environments. Some distros (like Android) disable debugfs in > > production. > > FWIW, I agree debugfs is not right. If others feel it's right in /proc, > I certainly won't NAK -- it's just been that we've traditionally been > trying to avoid continuing to pollute the top-level /proc and instead > associate new things with something in /sys. You can create your own file system, but I would suggest using kernfs for it ;-) If you look in /sys/kernel/ you'll see a bunch of kernel file systems already there: ~# mount |grep kernel securityfs on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime) debugfs on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime) tracefs on /sys/kernel/tracing type tracefs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime) configfs on /sys/kernel/config type configfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime) -- Steve
