Configfs vs ioctl
Posted Aug 26, 2005 15:47 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata
Parent article: Configfs - an introduction
I can see that configfs can replace special purpose configuration/control filesystems, but I don't see it eliminating much use of ioctl in its present form.
When you create something, you normally have parameters other than its name. mkdir() doesn't allow for any. ioctl() allows for as flexible a parameter scheme as you need. To use configfs where a directory stands for an object, you'd have to do some complicated thing where the object is in a "being built" state while you write to files and supply the creation parameters with additional system calls. What a mess. Extra code; synchronization nightmares.
I like the idea, but it needs an interface for creating directories that allows for parameters.
to post comments)