Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 16:22:40 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     Karim Yaghmour <karim.yaghmour@opersys.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Manoj Rao <linux@manojrajarao.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        atish patra <atishp04@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] Provide in-kernel headers to make extending
 kernel easier
Message-ID: <20190416142240.GA31920@kroah.com>
References: <CAOesGMiuGK-Sbqo2z=1ab070JONav1LF82MRRLCdX-4+14_XZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190411031540.ehezr6kq7ouobpzx@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
 <CAOesGMgiPB=7FE7tXXHes7WSLfByyPxirOStoH21NZqMwaUihQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190415104109.64d914f3@gandalf.local.home>
 <CAGXu5j+KPVRcOJ3Ue9ZQF93GyaDhvCnFCvJ_C3WKCx2=SNdDyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190416083306.5646a687@gandalf.local.home>
 <20190416124939.GB6027@kroah.com>
 <20190416130440.GA7944@localhost>
 <f8b15e31-1aab-ab2c-d44d-47325faab67d@opersys.com>
 <20190416094509.1af6326b@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190416094509.1af6326b@gandalf.local.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:45:09AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:32:37 -0400
> Karim Yaghmour <karim.yaghmour@opersys.com> wrote:
> 
> > >>> Then we should perhaps make a new file system call tarballs ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>   /sys/kernel/tarballs/
> > >>>
> > >>> and place everything there. That way it removes it from /proc (which is
> > >>> the worse place for that) and also makes it something other than debug.
> > >>> That's what I did for tracefs.  
> > >>
> > >> As horrible as that suggestion is, it does kind of make sense :)
> > >>
> > >> We can't put this in debugfs as that's only for debugging and systems
> > >> should never have that mounted for normal operations (users want to
> > >> build ebpf programs), and /proc really should be for processes but that
> > >> horse is long left the barn.
> > >>
> > >> But, I'm willing to consider putting this either in a system-fs-like
> > >> filesystem, or just in sysfs itself, we do have /sys/kernel/ to play
> > >> around in if the main objection is that we should not be cluttering up
> > >> /proc with stuff like this.
> > >>  
> > > 
> > > I am ok with the suggestion of /sys/kernel for the archive. That also seems
> > > to fit well with the idea that the headers are kernel related and probably
> > > belong here more strictly speaking, than /proc.  
> > 
> > This makes sense. And if it alleviates concerns regarding extending 
> > /proc ABIs then might as well switch to this.
> > 
> > Olof, what do you think of this?
> 
> BTW, the name "tarballs" was kind of a joke. Probably should come up
> with a better name. Although, I'm fine with tarballsfs ;-)

No need to have this be a separate filesystem, we can use a binary sysfs
file in /sys/kernel/ for this as the kernel is not doing any "parsing"
of the data, it is just dumping it out to userspace.

If I make /sys/kernel/config.gz be the same thing as /proc/config.gz
will you fix up 'make localmodconfig' to use it?  :)

thanks,

greg k-h