On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I wonder how fast it would be holding a pid with another open()ed fd. > And then you need to read comm (or how you filter whom to kill). > It seems to me that procfs will be even slower with this safe-way. > But I might misunderstand the idea, excuses. > > So, I just wanted to gently remind about procfs with netlink socket[1]. We discussed netlink was extensively on the thread about /proc/pid/kill. For numerous reasons, it's not suitable for fundamental process management. We really need an FD-based interface to processes, just like we have FD-based interfaces to other resource types. We need something consistent and reliable, not an abuse of a monitoring interface. > Probably, if it's time to add a new API for procfs, netlink may be more > desirable. Definitely not.
