linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Paul Simons <npsimons@fsmlabs.com>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@ragingbull.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: system call for process information?
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 19:56:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010312195647.A32437@fsmlabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0103121324280.25792-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103122111500.31224-100000@erdos.shef.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103122111500.31224-100000@erdos.shef.ac.uk>; from g.liakhovetski@ragingbull.com on Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 09:21:37PM +0000

On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 09:21:37PM +0000, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> CPU utilisation. Each new application has to calculate it (ps, top, qps,
> kps, various sysmons, procmons, etc.). Wouldn't it be worth it having a
> syscall for that? Wouldn't it be more optimal?

	No, it wouldn't be worth it because you're talking about 
sacrificing simplicity and kernel speed in favor of functionality.
This has been know to lead to "bloat-ware".  Every new syscall you
add takes just a little bit more time and space in the kernel, and
when only a small number of programs will be using it, it's really 
not worth it.  This time and space may not be large, but once you
get _your_ syscall added, why can't everyone else get theirs added 
as well?  And so, after making about a thousand specialized syscalls
standard in the kernel, you end up with IRIX (from what I've heard).
	Don't even get me started about opening security holes, and
increasing code complexity.  Please do a search for every other
syscall that has ever been proposed on this list, read them all 
and the arguments for them, then think long and hard about why yours
should be accepted.  Because I'm sure that I'm not the only person
who's going to want a good explanation as to why this syscall is
essential.

ps - CPU time is cheap, that's why they don't charge for it anymore.
Programmer time is _not_.

  reply	other threads:[~2001-03-13  2:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-12 17:08 system call for process information? Guennadi Liakhovetski
2001-03-12 18:27 ` Alexander Viro
2001-03-12 21:21   ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2001-03-13  2:56     ` Nathan Paul Simons [this message]
2001-03-13  3:20       ` Alexander Viro
2001-03-13  9:55         ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2001-03-13 21:05       ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-03-13 22:02         ` Nathan Paul Simons
2001-03-13 22:50           ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-03-13 22:52         ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-14  1:53           ` Martin Dalecki
2001-03-14  2:28             ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-14  8:24               ` george anzinger
2001-03-14 19:19                 ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-14 16:27                   ` george anzinger
2001-03-15 12:24                   ` changing mm->mmap_sem (was: Re: system call for process information?) Rik van Riel
2001-03-16  9:49                     ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-16 11:50                       ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-16 12:53                         ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2001-03-18  7:23                           ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-18  9:56                             ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-18 10:46                               ` Rik van Riel
2001-03-18 12:33                                 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-14  1:59           ` system call for process information? john slee
2001-03-14 19:53   ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-03-14 19:55     ` Alexander Viro
2001-03-14 20:23       ` Szabolcs Szakacsits
2001-03-14 20:21         ` Alexander Viro
2001-03-13 12:17 Rajiv Majumdar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010312195647.A32437@fsmlabs.com \
    --to=npsimons@fsmlabs.com \
    --cc=g.liakhovetski@ragingbull.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).