Re: [PATCH][2.6.7-mm5] perfctr low-level documentation

[Andrew Morton]

Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 15:44:14 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm
> >> considering Christoph Hellwig's suggestion of moving
> >> the API back to /proc/<pid>/, but with multiple files
> >> and open/read/write/mmap instead of ioctl. I believe I
> >> can make that work, but it would take a couple of days
> >> to implement properly. Please indicate if you would like
> >> this change or not.
> >
> >What would be the advantages of such a change?
> 
> Eliminating the 6 or so new syscalls I was forced
> to add when nuking the old ioctl() API.

syscalls are cheap.

> There would be a /proc/<pid>/<tid>/perfctr/ directory
> with files representing the control data, counter
> state, general info, and auxiliary control ops.

Futzing around with /proc handlers and mmapping /proc files doesn't sound
very attractive.  Unless we have some solid reason for changing things
I'd be inclined to leave it as-is.  Do you agree?
-
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/