From: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Tools better than vmstat [was: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?]
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 23:00:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010928230034.F15457@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200109281826.f8SIQLP06585@deathstar.prodigy.com> <Pine.LNX.4.33L.0109281535220.26495-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> <20010928123455.B8222@mikef-linux.matchmail.com> <20010928210453.B15457@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20010928145324.A14801@mikef-linux.matchmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010928145324.A14801@mikef-linux.matchmail.com>; from mfedyk@matchmail.com on Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 02:53:24PM -0700
On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 02:53:24PM -0700, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> Is there any possibility of using Russell's patch for this user space tool?
There is one property the kernel space method has over any user space
tool on a UP machine (and conceivably a SMP machine with more code) -
you get a complete atomic snapshot of the VM state. Might be useful
and important, but might not be.
It would be pretty easy to change my kernel patch to produce what you're
requesting, from another sysrq key combination.
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-28 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-28 3:17 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer? Thomas Hood
2001-09-28 3:50 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-28 18:26 ` bill davidsen
2001-09-28 18:36 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-28 19:14 ` Pau Aliagas
2001-09-28 22:20 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-28 19:34 ` Tools better than vmstat [was: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?] Mike Fedyk
[not found] ` <20010928210453.B15457@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
2001-09-28 21:53 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-09-28 22:00 ` Russell King [this message]
2001-09-28 22:33 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-09-28 23:00 ` Russell King
2001-09-29 0:18 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-09-29 1:08 ` 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer? Mike Fedyk
2001-09-29 1:20 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-29 1:25 ` [Kinda-OT] Reinventing wheels [was: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?] Mike Fedyk
2001-10-01 11:14 ` 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer? Daniel Phillips
2001-10-01 13:57 ` Load control (was: Re: 2.4.9-ac16 good perfomer?) Rik van Riel
2001-10-01 16:05 ` Daniel Phillips
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=20010928230034.F15457@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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