[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131007181018.GL6882@two.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 20:10:18 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Janani Venkataraman <jananive@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, amwang@...hat.com,
rdunlap@...otime.net, aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, hch@....de,
mhiramat@...hat.com, jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com,
xemul@...allels.com, suzuki@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, adobriyan@...il.com,
tarundsk@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, vapier@...too.org,
roland@...k.frob.com, tj@...nel.org, ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
gorcunov@...nvz.org, avagin@...nvz.org, oleg@...hat.com,
eparis@...hat.com, d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com,
james.hogan@...tec.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/19] Non disruptive application core dump
infrastructure using task_work_add()
> > Couldn't they just use the new process_vm_readv() syscalls instead?
> > AFAIK those do not require ptrace.
> >
> We need the register set and hence would need a ptrace.
But the kernel needs to stop to to read the registers.
Do you have data how much the latency difference is between
an optimized ptrace reader (using PTRACE_GETREGSET) vs the kernel ?
-Andi
--
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