Subject: Re: Getting rid of /dev/veriexec
To: None <>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
List: tech-kern
Date: 12/02/2005 11:15:06
> sysctl's use to e.g. read PCBs etc. is really because we don't have
> another "good" way of doing it without groveling /dev/kmem.  (It has
> a side benefit of having an explicit packing routine in the kernel so
> that the information can be send back in an ABI-neutral way.)

Making it an ioctl on /dev/kmem would have brought the same benefits.

> I don't really like how we overload sysctl in this way.  Mach
> messages are a much better way of doing this type of request/response
> operation.  But we don't have Mach messaging, so we overloaded
> sysctl.

Doesn't a dedicated socket address family come close?  (That's a
serious question; I don't know enough about Mach to answer it myself.)
AF_KERN anyone?

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B