From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org,
hpa@zytor.com, ak@linux.intel.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
dave.hansen@intel.com, arjan@linux.intel.com,
adobriyan@gmail.com, aubrey.li@intel.com,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 1/3] proc: add /proc/<pid>/arch_status
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 20:18:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190523201822.cc554d68ec567164bec781e1@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190425143219.102258-1-aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 22:32:17 +0800 Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> The architecture specific information of the running processes
> could be useful to the userland. Add /proc/<pid>/arch_status
> interface support to examine process architecture specific
> information externally.
I'll give this an
Acked-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
from a procfs POV and shall let the x86 maintainers worry about it.
I must say I'm a bit surprised that we don't already provide some form
of per-process CPU-specific info anywhere in procfs. Something to
piggy-back this onto. But I can't find such a thing.
I assume we've already discussed why this is a new procfs file rather
than merely a new line in /proc/<pid>/status. If so, please add the
reasoning to the changelog. If not, please discuss now ;)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-24 3:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-25 14:32 [PATCH v18 1/3] proc: add /proc/<pid>/arch_status Aubrey Li
2019-04-25 14:32 ` [PATCH v18 2/3] x86,/proc/pid/arch_status: Add AVX-512 usage elapsed time Aubrey Li
2019-04-25 14:32 ` [PATCH v18 3/3] Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt: add arch_status file Aubrey Li
2019-05-24 3:18 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2019-05-27 7:16 ` [PATCH v18 1/3] proc: add /proc/<pid>/arch_status Li, Aubrey
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=20190523201822.cc554d68ec567164bec781e1@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).