Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 4 Nov 2002 21:42:16 -0700 | From | Erik Andersen <> | Subject | Re: ps performance sucks (was Re: dcache_rcu [performance results]) |
| |
On Tue Nov 05, 2002 at 12:57:45AM -0300, Werner Almesberger wrote: > Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > I had a very brief think about this at the weekend, seeing > > if I could make a big melting pot /proc/psinfo file > > You could take a more radical approach. Since the goal of such > a psinfo file would be to accelerate access to information > that's already available elsewhere, you can do away with many > of the niceties of procfs, e.g. > > - no need to be human-readable (e.g. binary or hex dump may > make sense in this case) > - may use other operations than just open and read (e.g.
Hehe. You just reinvented my old /dev/ps driver. :)
http://www.busybox.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb/busybox/examples/kernel-patches/devps.patch.9_25_2000?rev=1.2&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
This is what Linus has to say on the subject:
I do dislike /dev/ps mightily. If the problem is that /proc is too large, then the right solution is to just clean up /proc. Which is getting done. And yes, /proc will be larger than /dev/ps, but I still find that preferable to having two incompatible ways to do the same thing.
-Erik
-- Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/ --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |