Re: [PATCH] bpf: move the bpf syscall sysctl table to its own module

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:42:00AM +0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:35:29AM +0800, Yan Zhu wrote:
> > Sysctl table is easier to read under its own module.
> 
> Hey Yan, thanks for you patch!
> 
> This does not explain how this is being to help with maitenance as otherwise this makes
> kernel/sysctl.c hard to maintain and we also tend to get many conflicts. It also does not
> explain how all the filesystem sysctls are not gone and that this is just the next step, 
> moving slowly the rest of the sysctls. Explaining this in the commit log will help patch
> review and subsystem maintainers understand the conext / logic behind the move.
> 
> I'd be more than happy to take this if bpf folks Ack. To avoid conflicts I can route this
> through sysctl-next which is put forward in particular to avoid conflicts across trees for
> this effort. Let me know.

Thank you for your reply. 

My patch is based on sysctl-next, sorry I forgot to identify it as a patch from the
sysctl-next branch. I will send the v2 patch later.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux