[PATCH 0/3] arm64: cpuinfo: make /proc/cpuinfo more human-readable
Mark Rutland
mark.rutland at arm.com
Fri Oct 20 09:10:53 PDT 2017
Hi Al,
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 05:43:19PM -0600, Al Stone wrote:
> On 10/13/2017 08:27 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > I certainly agree that exposing the information that we have is useful,
> > as I have stated several times. I'm not NAKing exposing this information
> > elsewhere.
> >
> > If you want a consistent cross-architecture interface for this
> > information, then you need to propose a new one. That was we can
> > actually solve the underlying issues, for all architectures, without
> > breaking ABI.
> >
> > I would be *very* interested in such an interface, and would be more
> > than happy to help.
>
> I'm playing with some patches that do very similar things in sysfs, vs
> proc. Is that better :)?
Exposing data under sysfs is certainly better, yes. :)
> Obviously, you'll have to see the patches to
> properly answer that, but what I'm playing with at present is placing
> this info in new entries in /sys/devices/cpu and/or /sys/devices/system,
> and generating some of the content based on what's already in header files
> (e.g., in cputype.h).
My opposition to MIDR -> string mapping applies regardless of
location...
> The idea of course is to keep this new info from touching any existing
> info so we don't break compatibility -- does that feel like a better
> direction, at least?
... but otherwise this sounds good to me!
Thanks,
Mark.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list