On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:32:37 -0400 Karim Yaghmour karim.yaghmour@opersys.com wrote:
Then we should perhaps make a new file system call tarballs ;-)
/sys/kernel/tarballs/
and place everything there. That way it removes it from /proc (which is the worse place for that) and also makes it something other than debug. That's what I did for tracefs.
As horrible as that suggestion is, it does kind of make sense :)
We can't put this in debugfs as that's only for debugging and systems should never have that mounted for normal operations (users want to build ebpf programs), and /proc really should be for processes but that horse is long left the barn.
But, I'm willing to consider putting this either in a system-fs-like filesystem, or just in sysfs itself, we do have /sys/kernel/ to play around in if the main objection is that we should not be cluttering up /proc with stuff like this.
I am ok with the suggestion of /sys/kernel for the archive. That also seems to fit well with the idea that the headers are kernel related and probably belong here more strictly speaking, than /proc.
This makes sense. And if it alleviates concerns regarding extending /proc ABIs then might as well switch to this.
Olof, what do you think of this?
BTW, the name "tarballs" was kind of a joke. Probably should come up with a better name. Although, I'm fine with tarballsfs ;-)
-- Steve