[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:0.022 / U:4.312 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site