Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > +static struct ctl_table fs_base_table[] = {
>> >> > + {
>> >> > + .procname = "fs",
>> >> > + .mode = 0555,
>> >> > + .child = fs_table,
>> >> > + },
>> >> > + { }
>> >> > +};
>> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You don't need this at all.
>> >> > > +static int __init fs_procsys_init(void)
>> >> > +{
>> >> > + struct ctl_table_header *hdr;
>> >> > +
>> >> > + hdr = register_sysctl_table(fs_base_table);
>> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Please use register_sysctl instead.
>> >> AKA
>> >> hdr = register_sysctl("fs", fs_table);
>> >
>> > Ah, much cleaner thanks!
>>
>> It is my hope you we can get rid of register_sysctl_table one of these
>> days. It was the original interface but today it is just a
>> compatibility wrapper.
>>
>> I unfortunately ran out of steam last time before I finished converting
>> everything over.
>
> Let's give it one more go. I'll start with the fs stuff.
Just to be clear moving the tables out of kernel/sysctl.c is a related
but slightly different problem.
Today it looks like there are 35 calls of register_sysctl_table
and 9 calls of register_sysctl_paths.
Among them is lib/sysctl_test.c and check-sysctl-docs.
Meanwhile I can only find 5 calls to register_sysctl in the tree
so it looks like I didn't get very far converting things over.
Eric
