On 2019/4/8 1:34, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 12:32 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> This really lacks >> >> Cc: Linux API <linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> 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. Thanks, -Aubrey
