From: Roger Luethi <rl@hellgate.ch>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sf.net>, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [1/1][PATCH] nproc v2: netlink access to /proc information
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 20:43:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040909184300.GA28278@k3.hellgate.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040909003529.GI3106@holomorphy.com>
On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 17:35:29 -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 08:41:30PM +0200, Roger Luethi wrote:
> > A few notes:
> > - Access control can be implemented easily. Right now it would be bloat,
> > though -- the vast majority of fields in /proc are world-readable
> > (/proc/pid/environ being the notable exception).
> > - Additional process selectors (e.g. select by UID) are not hard to
> > add, either, should there ever be a need.
> > - There are a few things I'm not sure about: For instance, what is a good
> > return value for mm_struct related fields wrt kernel threads? I picked
> > 0, but ~(0) might be preferable because it's distinct.
> > Signed-off-by: Roger Luethi <rl@hellgate.ch>
>
> Any chance you could convert these to use the new vm statistics
> accounting?
Mea culpa. I copied the routines wholesale from 2.6.7 when I started
work on nproc. They still seemed to work with 2.6.9-rc1-bk13, I hadn't
noticed the work that had gone into field computation already. So for
CONFIG_MMU, values in both __task_mem and __task_mem_cheap are cheap
now. The routines can be merged.
!CONFIG_MMU is a different story. Presumably, it needs a change in the
fields that are offered (cp. task_mem in fs/proc/task_nommu.c).
FWIW, my prefered solution would be to have only one routine task_mem
to fill the respective struct for nproc and /proc.
There seems to be a discrepancy between current task_mem in
fs/proc/task_nommu.c and the __task_mem{,_cheap} routines you wrote
for the nproc !CONFIG_MMU case. Can you explain?
Roger
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-09 18:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-08 18:40 [0/1][ANNOUNCE] nproc v2: netlink access to /proc information Roger Luethi
2004-09-08 18:41 ` [1/1][PATCH] " Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 0:35 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 0:43 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 1:15 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 1:17 ` [1/2] rediff nproc v2 vs. 2.6.9-rc1-mm4 William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 1:21 ` [2/2] handle CONFIG_MMU=n and use new vm stats for CONFIG_MMU=y William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 1:22 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 1:26 ` [3/2] round up text memory to the nearest page in fs/proc/task_mmu.c William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 18:43 ` Roger Luethi [this message]
2004-09-09 18:49 ` [1/1][PATCH] nproc v2: netlink access to /proc information William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 19:00 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 19:02 ` [4/2] consolidate __task_mem() and __task_mem_cheap() William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 19:07 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 19:15 ` [5/2] fix nommu VSZ reporting in consolidated task_mem() William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 19:11 ` [1/1][PATCH] nproc v2: netlink access to /proc information Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 19:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 21:19 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-10 15:30 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-11 22:25 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-09-12 4:58 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 5:59 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 6:18 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 6:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 7:47 ` Greg Ungerer
2004-09-14 8:27 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 11:53 ` Stephen Smalley
2004-09-09 17:22 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-09 17:53 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 20:01 ` Stephen Smalley
2004-09-09 20:48 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-10 12:11 ` Stephen Smalley
2004-09-09 20:55 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 21:05 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-09 21:25 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-11 22:36 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-09-12 5:00 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 6:44 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 7:10 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 7:55 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 8:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 9:27 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 15:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 16:01 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 16:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 17:15 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 17:43 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 18:45 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 19:07 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 19:31 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 19:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-14 19:50 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-15 11:44 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-15 20:02 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-15 20:20 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-15 20:33 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-15 20:44 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 18:37 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-14 18:55 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-14 19:05 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-14 21:12 ` Roger Luethi
2004-09-09 20:44 ` Chris Wright
2004-09-16 21:43 ` nproc: So? Roger Luethi
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=20040909184300.GA28278@k3.hellgate.ch \
--to=rl@hellgate.ch \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=albert@users.sf.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.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