lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] [Patch 0/21] Non disruptive application core dump infrastructure
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 10:37:48 +0100
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hello, Suzuki.
>
> On 12/15/2010 06:34 AM, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> > I'd be very glad not using the freezer if there is a neat way to
> > accomplish this without the undesired side effects. Tejun's ptrace
> > enhancement would still require a userland program to control
> > it(gcore); something contained in the kernel would be ideal.
>
> Why is using gcore a bad thing? If we make ptrace avoid the implicit
> SIGSTOP, the side effects of ptrace would be the same as using freezer
> but with the benefit that it's properly integrated to the process
> model and job control.

The advantages of the new approach are :

1) A process can trigger a core synchronously, upon an event, say a signal
handler and continue from there. gcore would require a fork(), which is not
safe to use from a signal handler.

2) We can seek to only the data we need

Thanks
Suzuki



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-15 12:29    [W:0.098 / U:0.384 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site