On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 11:58 AM Alan Cox <gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I think the compressed tarball is much simpler/easier overall. If > > someone really wants the filesystem, they just uncompress it into a > > tmpfs mount. It's much less moving kernel code to worry about. > > There is an even simpler approach. The people who want this for whatever > strange reason are Android folks. Android lives on flash, so all they have > to do is put the headers in a flash file system that is updated with the > kernel and mount it wherever they like. Simple matter of a bit of > devicetree no ? Did you read the rest of the thread? We talked a lot about the problems with filesystem-based approaches. It's not just "Android folks" who want BPF-based tools to Just Work, and it's not "strange" to want that --- what's strange is this reflexive opposition to a pragmatic feature (one that nobody has to use) that will make a lot of system analysis cases Just Work. There's nothing wrong with having the kernel describe itself, and there's no reason to push tons of error-prone metadata tracking to userspace when the kernel can just talk about itself in a guaranteed-correct manner. Every argument against this work is also an argument against /proc/config.gz. Completely unsurprisingly, /proc/config.gz is in practice super useful.
