From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@ragingbull.com>
To: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: system call for process information?
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:21:37 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103122111500.31224-100000@erdos.shef.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0103121324280.25792-100000@weyl.math.psu.edu>
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>
> > I need to collect some info on processes. One way is to read /proc
> > tree. But isn't there a system call (ioctl) for this? And what are those
>
> Occam's Razor. Why invent new syscall when read() works?
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?
> > task[], task_struct, etc. about?
>
> What branch? (2.0, 2.2, 2.4?)
Well, what I mean was - don't these structures contain the information I
am looking for? Let's start from the end - 2.4, then what's the difference
with 2.2 and finally 2.0?
Thanks
Guennadi
___
Dr. Guennadi V. Liakhovetski
Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Sheffield, U.K.
email: G.Liakhovetski@sheffield.ac.uk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-12 21:18 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 [this message]
2001-03-13 2:56 ` Nathan Paul Simons
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=Pine.LNX.4.21.0103122111500.31224-100000@erdos.shef.ac.uk \
--to=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).