Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762504AbYGBG2M (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:28:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756582AbYGBG16 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:27:58 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:51288 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755653AbYGBG15 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:27:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18539.8141.683072.967851@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 16:27:25 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Is sysfs the right place to get cache and CPU topology info? X-Mailer: VM 8.0.9 under Emacs 22.1.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1866 Lines: 37 I'm being asked by library developers about what is the best way for them to get information about the CPU cache structure and the CPU topology from the kernel. When I said "x86 puts it in sysfs and we'll do the same on powerpc" I got a response pointing me at this statement in Documentation/sysfs-rules.txt (the first paragraph): "The kernel-exported sysfs exports internal kernel implementation details and depends on internal kernel structures and layout. It is agreed upon by the kernel developers that the Linux kernel does not provide a stable internal API. As sysfs is a direct export of kernel internal structures, the sysfs interface cannot provide a stable interface either; it may always change along with internal kernel changes." They read that to mean that sysfs is not a suitable interface for them to use to get information about the system. In particular they read that to mean that if they do code their library to read sysfs, it will change in the future in such a way as to break their code. In other words, they see sysfs as being completely useless for them because they can't depend on it as a stable interface. Which is reasonable given the quoted paragraph, but on the other hand, I don't believe we break userspace interfaces as blithely as that paragraph suggests. So which is it? Can they rely on the CPU cache and topology information under /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*, and rely on having that information there essentially forever? Or are they correct in saying sysfs is useless and we need to find some other way to expose the cache and topology information? Thanks, Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/