On 2019/4/8 9:52, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 5:38 PM Li, Aubrey <aubrey...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/4/8 1:34, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 12:32 PM Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2019, Aubrey Li wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The architecture specific information of the running processes could
>>>>> be useful to the userland. Add support to examine process architecture
>>>>> specific information externally.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey...@linux.intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
>>>>> Cc: Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.c...@linux.intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.han...@intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> This really lacks
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Linux API <linux-...@vger.kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobri...@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
>>>>
>>>> Cc'ed now.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I certainly understand why you want to expose this info, but would it
>>> make more sense to instead add an arch_status file in /proc with
>>> architecture-specific info?  Or maybe an x86_status field for x86
>>> status, etc.
>>>
>>
>> I tried this, but no other architecture showed interest in arch_status
>> under /proc.
>>
> 
> Why is that a problem?  It could exist on x86 and not exist on other
> arches until needed.
> 

I placed it in tid_base_stuff, under live_patch entry, so it exists for
all arches, is there a better way to do this?

Thanks,
-Aubrey

Reply via email to