On 2019/4/8 9:52, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 5:38 PM Li, Aubrey <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 2019/4/8 1:34, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 12:32 PM Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: Andi Kleen <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: Tim Chen <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: Dave Hansen <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> This really lacks >>>> >>>> Cc: Linux API <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> 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
