Re: Inconsistancies in /proc (status vs statm) leading to wrong documentation(proc.txt)

[Eric Valette]

Albert Cahalan wrote:

> > Well the Documentation is said to matches 2.6.8-rc3 and is only 5 weeks 
> > old according to bitkeeper changesets... So at least the doc should be 
> > fixed.
>
>
> Removal would be simpler.

I beg to disagree. statm catche eyes when you want to know precisely 
your memory usage or do you consider to be the single statm user via procps?

> Second of all, because you get more information this
> way. You can subtract to determine the address space
> used for IO alone.

Sure but displaying it via status information would be much more simple 
furthermore I think it is incorrectly computed.

> I could go for another number: available address space.
> Then I could display percent used.

The free command does provide the information I think so it must be 
somewhere else...

> Even the other files are only partly for humans.
> Minor changes will cause many tools to break.

Sure but many people in the embedded wolrd need to know precisley 
process memory usage and possibly inside the program itsel not via 
top/ps/free/...

And if tools display wrong information for ages, then it can still be 
fixed...

--
   __
  /  `                   	Eric Valette
 /--   __  o _.          	6 rue Paul Le Flem
(___, / (_(_(__         	35740 Pace

Tel: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76	Fax: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76
E-mail: eric.valette@xxxxxxx



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/