Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:18:14 +0400 | From | Cyrill Gorcunov <> | Subject | Re: [patch 3/4] c/r: procfs: add arg_start/end, env_start/end and exit_code members to /proc/$pid/stat |
| |
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:12:45PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:54:50 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > /proc/pid/stat is getting out of control. People are now sending patches > > > because reading from this thing already takes too long. > > err, actually, that was /proc/stat/ >
Ah! (I saw those thread, but then I get confused and thought maybe there were for /proc/pid/stat as well but I simply missed it ;)
> > > > I can add prctl PR_GET_MM with subcodes, since PR_SET_MM is already here > > and wrapped with CHECKPOINT_RESTORE. Would this be better? > > mm, not really - /proc is the logical/expected place for it. > > I'm thinking that perhaps we should start again with all of this and > export all this information in brand new, well-designed procfs files. > We'd still maintain /proc/stat and /proc/pid/stat but people should > migrate off them. Eventually (10 years?) everyone will be setting their > CONFIG_PROC_[PID_]STAT to 'n' and perhaps we can retire the things. > > Meanwhile, I suppose you may as well continue to make /proc/pid/stat > even crazier :( It isn't as bad as /proc/stat! >
At moment indeed it's not that bloated... yet.
> btw, do we really need to do "(mm && permitted)" so many times? ie, > can we split that seq_printf up and do > > if (mm && permitted) { > seq_printf(m + offset, "%lu", mm->start_data); > ... > } else { > seq_printf(m + offset, "0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"); > } > > ? Although this probably won't help much. >
Yeah we can. I'll update.
Cyrill
| |