From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 1/3] proc: add /proc//arch_status Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 20:18:22 -0700 Message-ID: <20190523201822.cc554d68ec567164bec781e1@linux-foundation.org> References: <20190425143219.102258-1-aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190425143219.102258-1-aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Aubrey Li 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 List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 22:32:17 +0800 Aubrey Li wrote: > The architecture specific information of the running processes > could be useful to the userland. Add /proc//arch_status > interface support to examine process architecture specific > information externally. I'll give this an Acked-by: Andrew Morton 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//status. If so, please add the reasoning to the changelog. If not, please discuss now ;)