On 2019/4/8 9:52, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 5:38 PM Li, Aubrey <aubrey.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> 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. >> > > 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
