cpufreq deprecation
Hi!
Today I learned that /proc/cpufreq is going to be removed from 2.6.. I thought that 2.6 means "no interface changes" :-(. Anyway, if we are going to warn about it, we might want to include newline...
Please apply,
Pavel
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_userspace.c +2 -2
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@if (!warning_print) { warning_print++; -printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01" ); +printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01\n" ); }if (write) {
@@ -214,7 +214,7 @@if (!warning_print) { warning_print++; -printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01" ); +printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01\n" ); }if (oldval && oldlenp) {
drivers/cpufreq/proc_intf.c +2 -2
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@if (!warning_print) { warning_print++; -printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/cpufreq is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01" ); +printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/cpufreq is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01\n" ); } p +=sprintf (p," minimum CPU frequency - maximum CPU frequency - policy\n" );
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@if (!warning_print) { warning_print++; -printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/cpufreq is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01" ); +printk (KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/cpufreq is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01\n" ); } proc_string[count] ='\0' ;
Signature · 2 lines
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
Pavel,
A scan of the lkml archives on theaimsgroup for cpufreq shows only this message about deprecation. Where was this discussed? Is there an alternative for this information being proposed?
Thanks,
Ray
Quoted 8 lines · Pavel Machek
Hi!
Today I learned that
/proc/cpufreqis going to be removed from 2.6.. I thought that 2.6 means "no interface changes" :-(. Anyway, if we are going to warn about it, we might want to include newline...Please apply,
Pavel
Signature · 9 lines
Best Regards,
Ray
-----------------------------------------------
Ray Bryant
512-453-9679 (work) 512-507-7807 (cell)
[email protected] [email protected]
The box said: "Requires Windows 98 or better",
so I installed Linux.
-----------------------------------------------Quoted 4 lines · Ray Bryant
Pavel,
A scan of the lkml archives on theaimsgroup for cpufreq shows only this message about deprecation. Where was this discussed?
Probably cpufreq list around the time cpufreq was first merged to mainline 2.6.
I never wanted to really see the proc stuff hit 2.6 at all, but someone (maybe Dominik) suggested that as there were tools using it, (a multitude of cpu scaling daemons appeared), we should drag it into 2.6 too, at least until the daemons caught up with the preferred interface.
It's been marked as 'deprecated' since day one of its inclusion. All the userspace tools that are actually decent enough to use are aware of the 2.6 interface, and will use those rather than the /proc interface.
Quoted 1 line
Is there an alternative for this information being proposed?
sysfs.
Dave
Hi!
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 2 lines
A scan of the lkml archives on theaimsgroup for cpufreq shows only this message about deprecation. Where was this discussed?
Probably cpufreq list around the time cpufreq was first merged to mainline 2.6.
I never wanted to really see the proc stuff hit 2.6 at all, but someone (maybe Dominik) suggested that as there were tools using it, (a multitude of cpu scaling daemons appeared), we should drag it into 2.6 too, at least until the daemons caught up with the preferred interface.
I do not think changing interface in half of stable series is good idea, but yes, it was market deprecated since day one. Keeping at least read-only /proc/cpufreq would be nice. Or perhaps merging that info into /proc/cpuinfo?
Pavel
Signature · 2 lines
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
Quoted 3 lines · Pavel Machek
Today I learned that
/proc/cpufreqis going to be removed from 2.6.. I thought that 2.6 means "no interface changes" :-(.
Well, we'll see. One very good reason for adding such a runtime warning is to give people six months to convince the developers that it's a bad idea.
Quoted 2 lines
Anyway, if
we are going to warn about it, we might want to include newline...
Sure.
Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1- printk(KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01"); + printk(KERN_INFO "Access to /proc/sys/cpu/ is deprecated and will be removed from (new) 2.6. kernels soon after 2005-01-01\n");
hrmpf. The original author is hereby impaled upon a metaphorical 80-col xterm. Shall fix that too.