Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:04:15 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kvm question Message-ID: <199901231904.LAA18363@bubba.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199901231658.IAA00639@dingo.cdrom.com> from Mike Smith at "Jan 23, 99 08:58:41 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith writes: > Yes, there's a desire to see this fixed; it requires a significant > rewrite of the sysctl stuff unfortunately. Mark Murray was working on > this but probably as a 4.x feature; if you have something simpler you > feel up to contributing in the short term you'd be very popular. Peter pointed out that having the sysctl's as symbols was a nice advantage of the current system. How important is this? If we were willing to give this up, then the SYSCTL() macro could just expand to a SYSINIT() that called sysctl_add_subtree() (or whatever you want to call it) upon loading. This sysctl_add_subtree() would maintain the sysctl tree... it would allow new subtrees and nodes to be added when new KLD's were loaded. It could also subtree support removal when the KLD goes away. Seems pretty straightforward, but I'm probably missing something. I don't think any user-land programs would have to change. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901231904.LAA18363>