Re: Proposed /proc/stat addition
Darren Reed (darrenr@cyber.com.au)
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:02:36 +1000 (EST)
In some mail I received from yuri mironoff, sie wrote
[...]
> Would it not be simpler to implement a set of system calls to return
> process information? No matter how much you optimize /proc its still a
> big drain on resources. (example: Top takes 5% CPU on PPro200 with ~100
> processes running. HP/UX "top" consumes less than 2% for ~400 procs on a
> PA-7150 100Mhz).
>
> I'm very much in favor of the VMS "$GETJPI"-like interface. It
> accepts as an argument an array of field descriptors (one for every
> requested process attribute) and a pid/procname/wildcard argument
> that specifies the process to find.
>
> Is this type of interface being worked on or would anyone mind
> terribly if it was implemented? An even better question: would this
> have a chance of being accepted into the kernel? Linus?
mmmm, pstat(2)
mmmm, writing non-setuid ps/w which work 100% compat. with setuid versions.
If this type of interface was implemented, I'd recommend a pstat(2)
compatible one so that in the event that an HP-PA port of Linux becoming
reality, pstat(2) is already supported (an aid for binary compat.).
Darren