[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2010 16:49:29 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: revert to show stack information in /proc/{pid}/status
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> writes:
>
> Anyway, I revert the regresstion patch as other regression patches. if you really want
> this feature, you have three options.
>
> 1. create new /proc file instead to use /proc/pid/status.
> 2. improve performance until typical use-case don't notice regression.
> 3. change ps and other /proc related userland implementation and resubmit this patch.
>
> But even if you choose anything, You have to test both its functional and performance
> _before_ submitting kernel patch.
4. Leave everything alone (revert all the commits) and use a ptrace
based tool to get this information when you need it.
That is what I suggested during the original code review and I still think
it's the best solution for such a obscure problem.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists