From alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Thu Apr 13 08:07:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com Received: from localhost (dillweed.dsl.xmission.com [10.0.0.1]) by dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D57A11A4F5 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:07:22 -0600 (MDT) Envelope-to: andersen@xmission.com Received: from mail.xmission.com by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.3.3) for andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (single-drop); Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:07:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [194.168.151.1] (helo=the-village.bc.nu) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #3) id 12fhQk-0002OZ-00 for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 05:05:03 -0600 Received: from alan by the-village.bc.nu with local (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12fhQ9-0002nD-00 for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:04:25 +0100 Subject: Re: kernel ps drivers [Was: vm locking question] To: andersen@xmission.com Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:04:23 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <20000412224130.A2748@xmission.com> from "Erik Andersen" at Apr 12, 2000 10:41:30 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Status: RO X-Status: A Content-Length: 242 Lines: 6 > On the subject of ps, would you be willing to accept my /dev/ps > patch into the kernel? If no, any suggestions on what should > be done differently (if anything) to make it worthy of inclusion? For 2.2.x no, for 2.3.x ask Linus not me From torvalds@transmeta.com Thu Apr 13 09:18:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com Received: from localhost (dillweed.dsl.xmission.com [10.0.0.1]) by dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3776411A3DF for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:18:16 -0600 (MDT) Envelope-to: andersen@xmission.com Received: from mail.xmission.com by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.3.3) for andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (single-drop); Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:18:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [209.10.217.66] (helo=neon-gw.transmeta.com) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #3) id 12flK2-0004dd-00 for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:14:22 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by neon-gw.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA18635; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:10:51 -0700 Received: from mailhost.transmeta.com(10.1.1.15) by neon-gw.transmeta.com via smap (V2.1) id xma018629; Thu, 13 Apr 00 08:10:25 -0700 Received: from penguin.transmeta.com (root@penguin.transmeta.com [10.1.2.202]) by deepthought.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA12264; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (torvalds@localhost) by penguin.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA02051; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: penguin.transmeta.com: torvalds owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Erik Andersen Cc: Alan Cox Subject: Re: kernel ps drivers [Was: vm locking question] In-Reply-To: <20000413083127.A976@xmission.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO Content-Length: 659 Lines: 16 On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Erik Andersen wrote: > > For 2.3.x would you be willing to accept my /dev/ps driver into the kernel? > (Assuming I remove the /dev/modules driver (since it was pointed out that there > is a perfectly good syscall providing that interface). If no, is there anything > that could be done differently (if anything) to make it worthy of inclusion? 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. Linus