From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 06:47:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 06:47:53 -0400 Received: from violet.setuza.cz ([194.149.118.97]:15120 "EHLO violet.setuza.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 06:47:53 -0400 Subject: Re: counters From: Frank Schaefer To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3CE4C895.EB34A245@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release) Date: 17 May 2002 12:47:53 +0200 Message-Id: <1021632473.250.1.camel@ADMIN> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2002-05-17 at 11:08, Manik Raina wrote: > > Thanks for your response. What i meant was > every process could have an account of how > many bytes were read/written to various > filesystems/sockets using read()/write() > system calls. > > We could dump this stuff in /proc and > it could tell us which processes are > heavily IO bound. > > I am wondering if this information will > be useful to anyone. Hi Manik and sorry that I read only half of your initial post. I had a quick look at fs/read_write.c. I don't see any hook in the functions here, to perform such a task. And here this should belong to -- shouldn't it? the functions could add ``count'' to the procfs entry of ``current''. (just a thought) This info could be valuable - I think - if it wouldn't make a large performance issue. Regards Frank