[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] coredump: core dump masking support v2

Robin Holt wrote:
>>>Can you make this a little more transparent? Having a magic bitmask does
>>>not seem like the best way to do stuff. Could you maybe make a core_flags
>>>directory with a seperate file for each flag. It could still map to a
>>>single field in the mm, but be broken out for the proc filesystem.
>>It seems to be one of the good enhancement idea, thanks.:-)
>>But currently, there is only one flag. So we had better keep this simple
>>implementation until someone requests to add a new flag.
> If that is the case, can we rename the file from core_flags to something
> more descriptive like dump_core_skip_anonymous_mappings. The name
> is a wild suggestion, the renaming does seem fairly important to me.
> Remember once you get this in, changing the name will be fairly difficult
> as admin tools and documentation will adopt the name. These are usually
> cases where it is better to do it right the first time.

Okay, I'll adopt your idea in the next version.
I'm going to provide the proc entry as follows:

(1) /proc/<pid>/core_flags/flags
(2) /proc/<pid>/core_flags/omit_anon_shared

(1) is the same as current core_flags. It is for expert users.
(2) corresponds to one bit in (1).
If (2) is set to 1, anonymous shared memory of the process is never

Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-01-31 13:43    [W:0.063 / U:1.764 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site