From: Laurent <laurent@augias.org>
To: Val Henson <val@nmt.edu>, "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: read_proc issue
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 00:32:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E16gDYp-0000FG-00@lsinitam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E16fmE1-0000Mu-00@lsinitam> <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0202271122040.1463-100000@dragon.pdx.osdl.net> <20020227140432.L20918@boardwalk>
In-Reply-To: <20020227140432.L20918@boardwalk>
> I've encountered this problem before, too. What is the "One True Way"
> to do this cleanly? In other words, if you want to do a calculation
> once every time someone runs "cat /proc/foo", what is the cleanest way
> to do that? The solution we came up with was to check the file offset
> and only do the calculation if offset == 0, which seems pretty
> hackish.
I've tried it and... it works ! :)
Many many thanks :)
In the meantime, I've also followed Tommy Reynolds' advice to not modify
global state variables within read_procmem. I've intercepted a syscall which
does the calculation (I've used the open syscall since it allowed me to
increase the counter by just running vi on any file ;) ) and put it into a
buffer which is dumped when the /proc entry is read. Works great that way too.
By the way, as the final module will intercept syscalls like open, creat,
close, link, unlink, mkdir, etc. , I'm wondering if there'll be a dramatic
negative impact on file operations performance. Is there any efficient method
to measure this ?
In any case, thanks for all the help you gave me :)
Regards,
Laurent Sinitambirivoutin
laurent@augias.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-27 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-26 18:21 read_proc issue Laurent
2002-02-27 19:33 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-02-27 21:04 ` Val Henson
2002-02-27 21:42 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-27 21:44 ` Cort Dougan
2002-02-28 0:05 ` Erik Mouw
2002-02-27 3:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-03-01 7:14 ` Erik Mouw
2002-03-01 7:47 ` Alexander Viro
2002-03-01 8:18 ` Laurent
2002-03-01 8:18 ` Alexander Viro
2002-03-01 19:49 ` Cort Dougan
2002-02-27 23:32 ` Laurent [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-27 0:51 Thomas Hood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E16gDYp-0000FG-00@lsinitam \
--to=laurent@augias.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=val@nmt.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.