On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
quoted text
> > On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 16:34 +0200, J=C3=B6rn Engel wrote:
> > They certainly can, but should they?  There may be some reason to prefe=
r
quoted text
> > sysfs that should be self-evident - except that I'm a bit thick and see=
m
quoted text
> > to need it spelled out.  Or maybe I've just become disillusioned with
> > the practice of replacing crappy interfaces (ioctl here) with other
> > crappy interfaces (sysfs here) and having to support both for all
> > eternity.  sysctl, ioctl, proc, sysfs, debugfs, netlink, ... -
> > individually they all suck in their own peculiar way.  But together the=
y
quoted text
> > create a mess I no longer dare to name.
>=20
> The plus of sysfs I see is that I can add more files to expose more
> information in sysfs, while I can not change MEMGETINFO ioctl. E.g., I
> need to expose sub-page size to user-space, and I cannot do this with
> MEMGETINFO.

You can do this with ioctls, if you designed them with extra space and
versioning from the beginning.