RFC: Get rid of CONFIG_PROC_FS, was Re: "CONFIG_PROCFS" problem in 2.3.18ac8

Arjan van de Ven (adve@oce.nl)
Thu, 23 Sep 1999 08:30:32 +0200 (CEST)

Jeff Garzik had the wisdom to write:
JG> When you include proc_fs.h you should not need _any_ ifdefs at all.
JG> Inlined no-op versions of the procfs API functions are substituted when

Not completely true. The functions are stubbed, but things like proc_root
and the inode-operations aren't. Although Alan fixed the ugliest part in
2.1.13x, CONFIG_PROC_FS is still very ugly, and a lot of ifdef's are needed.

RFC: Get rid of CONFIG_PROC_FS

I hereby propose to get rid of the configuration-option CONFIG_PROC_FS and
make the proc-filesystem mantadory.

Reasons for doing so:
1) It cleans up a lot of code
2) There probably not one single sole that doesn't use procfs
3) The kernel _might_ build without procfs, but nobody tested if the
stubs actually work
4) Codesize is hardly an issue, since the stubs also increase codesize

Reasons for not doing so:
1) Codesize (?)
2) Featurefreeze
3) Security (?)

I therefore propose to make CONFIG_PROC_FS mantadory. If the kernel-gods
agree, I volunteer to send a patch (or more likely, a group of patches) for
it.

Any comments ?

Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/