Re: [RFC][Patch 0/4] Per-task delay accounting

[Andrew Morton]

Shailabh Nagar <nagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> They are made available through a connector interface which allows
>  - stats for a given <pid> to be obtained in response to a command
>  which specifies the <pid>. The need for dynamically obtaining delay
>  stats is the reason why piggybacking delay stats onto BSD process
>  accounting wasn't considered.

I think this is the first time that anyone has come out with real code
which does per-task accounting via connector.

Which makes one wonder where this will end up.  If numerous different
people add numerous different accounting messages, presumably via different
connector channels then it may all end up a bit of a mess.  Given the way
kernel development happens, that's pretty likely.

For example, should the next developer create a new message type, or should
he tack his desired fields onto the back of yours?  If the former, we'll
end up with quite a lot of semi-duplicated code and a lot more messages and
resources than we strictly need.  If the latter, then perhaps the
versioning you have in there will suffice - I'm not sure.

I wonder if at this stage we should take a shot at some overarching "how do
do per-task accounting messages over connector" design which can at least
incorporate the various things which people have been talking about
recently?
-
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/