From owner-freebsd-arch  Fri Jan 19 12:57:40 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3313637B400
	for <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:57:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gosset.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP
          id <aa79706@salmon>; 19 Jan 2001 20:57:22 +0000 (GMT)
To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: dynamic vs static sysctls? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:50:24 PST."
             <200101190850.f0J8oO891717@earth.backplane.com> 
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 20:57:21 +0000
From: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie>
Message-ID:  <200101192057.aa79706@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message <200101190850.f0J8oO891717@earth.backplane.com>, Matt Dillon writes:

>:Lacking that, a sysctl directly into the filesystem sounds like a
>:pretty good solution to me.

>    fcntl would work... after all, the POSIX locking functions already do
>    copyin/copyout using fcntl.  It should give Kirk everything he needs.
>    It would certainly be better then sysctl.
>

There's also mount(2). NFS export lists are passed to the filesystem
via a special mount call this way. It's hardly an interface designed
to be extensible, but it does go straight to the filesystem from
a syscall.

Ian


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message