Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-22 Thread Mikael Pettersson
Al Viro writes: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > Andi Kleen writes: > > > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >this subdir; > > > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > > > > > That's always a good thing.

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-22 Thread Andi Kleen
Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: >> Andi Kleen writes: >> > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > >this subdir; >> > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. >> > >> > That's always a good thing. >> > >> > >

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-22 Thread Andi Kleen
Al Viro wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note: update your

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-22 Thread Mikael Pettersson
Al Viro writes: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note:

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-21 Thread Al Viro
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > Andi Kleen writes: > > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >this subdir; > > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > > > That's always a good thing. > > > > > Note: update your

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-21 Thread Al Viro
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:23PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note: update your initscripts to mount

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-19 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 13:39 +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > Sysctl files/inodes now have their own readdir and lookup > methods, so there is one step left in turning this into a > separate filesystem. > > The benefits of this are: > > 1. this will allow to remove a fancy revalidation rules

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-19 Thread Stephen Smalley
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 13:39 +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: Sysctl files/inodes now have their own readdir and lookup methods, so there is one step left in turning this into a separate filesystem. The benefits of this are: 1. this will allow to remove a fancy revalidation rules from

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Feb 15 2008 17:57, Oliver Pinter wrote: >> > >> >Doing it automatically is the only acceptable way, IMO. >> >> For time being only. >> >> The kernel (currently) only auto-mounts invisible filesystems. > and /selinux with selinuxfs, it is automounted ... but it is visible fs > Sorry if I do not

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Feb 15 2008 08:34, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> > >> >Doing it automatically is the only acceptable way, IMO. >> >> For time being only. >> >> The kernel (currently) only auto-mounts invisible filesystems. > >like /root, sysfs, futexfs, pipefs, anon_inodefs, bdev, devpts, >hugetlbfs, inotifyfs ?

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Oliver Pinter
On 2/15/08, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 15 2008 12:35, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > >Andi Kleen writes: > > > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > this subdir; > > > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > > > > > That's always a good

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:44:35 +0100 (CET) Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Feb 15 2008 12:35, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > >Andi Kleen writes: > > > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >this subdir; > > > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > > > > > That's

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Feb 15 2008 12:35, Mikael Pettersson wrote: >Andi Kleen writes: > > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >this subdir; > > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > > > That's always a good thing. > > > > > Note: update your initscripts to mount sysctl

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Mikael Pettersson
Andi Kleen writes: > Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >this subdir; > > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. > > That's always a good thing. > > > Note: update your initscripts to mount sysctl filesystem > > right after the proc is mounted in order not

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Andi Kleen
Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >this subdir; > 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. > Note: update your initscripts to mount sysctl filesystem > right after the proc is mounted in order not to lose your > /etc/sysctl.conf

[PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Pavel Emelyanov
Sysctl files/inodes now have their own readdir and lookup methods, so there is one step left in turning this into a separate filesystem. The benefits of this are: 1. this will allow to remove a fancy revalidation rules from sysctl dentries (will be in a separate patch); 2. the same approach

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Andi Kleen
Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note: update your initscripts to mount sysctl filesystem right after the proc is mounted in order not to lose your /etc/sysctl.conf configuration

[PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Pavel Emelyanov
Sysctl files/inodes now have their own readdir and lookup methods, so there is one step left in turning this into a separate filesystem. The benefits of this are: 1. this will allow to remove a fancy revalidation rules from sysctl dentries (will be in a separate patch); 2. the same approach

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Mikael Pettersson
Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note: update your initscripts to mount sysctl filesystem right after the proc is mounted in order not to lose your

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:44:35 +0100 (CET) Jan Engelhardt wrote: On Feb 15 2008 12:35, Mikael Pettersson wrote: Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing.

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Oliver Pinter
On 2/15/08, Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 15 2008 12:35, Mikael Pettersson wrote: Andi Kleen writes: Pavel Emelyanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this subdir; 3. sysctl inodes are now smaller than the procfs ones. That's always a good thing. Note: update

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Feb 15 2008 17:57, Oliver Pinter wrote: Doing it automatically is the only acceptable way, IMO. For time being only. The kernel (currently) only auto-mounts invisible filesystems. and /selinux with selinuxfs, it is automounted ... but it is visible fs Sorry if I do not know all the

Re: [PATCH] Make sysctl a separate filesystem

2008-02-15 Thread Jan Engelhardt
On Feb 15 2008 08:34, Randy Dunlap wrote: Doing it automatically is the only acceptable way, IMO. For time being only. The kernel (currently) only auto-mounts invisible filesystems. like /root, sysfs, futexfs, pipefs, anon_inodefs, bdev, devpts, hugetlbfs, inotifyfs ? Yes? / (double