linux-kernel - RE: /proc/stat vs. failed order-4 allocation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <94D0CD8314A33A4D9D801C0FE68B402956F33B6F@G9W0745.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 03:05:35 +0000
From:	"Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@...com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andrea Righi <andrea@...terlinux.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hendrik Brueckner <brueckner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thorsten Diehl <thorsten.diehl@...ibm.com>
Subject: RE: /proc/stat vs. failed order-4 allocation



> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 9:32 AM
> To: Heiko Carstens
> Cc: Andrew Morton; KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki; Andrea Righi; Eric Dumazet; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org; Hendrik Brueckner;
> Thorsten Diehl
> Subject: Re: /proc/stat vs. failed order-4 allocation
> 
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 02:25:21PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm just wondering why /proc/stat is a single_open() seq_file and not a
> > regular seq_file with an iterator (say 48 online cpus for each iteration
> > or something similar).
> 
> Probably because no one sent a patch for it. I'm pretty sure it used the
> even more horrible old proc ops before and was converted in batch with
> various other files.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/20/153 worried about performance and led to 
the current code; the reply in https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/23/41 
discussed using seq_file, but that idea was rejected at the time.

Be careful about losing consistency of the information for the CPUs.

--
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/