Hi! > > The use-case for this is different: the ^T-line as proposed by this > > patch is for the user that interacts with a system through a terminal, who > > wants to be informed not about the whole system (sort of what SysRq-t > > tells you), but about what they run on that particular tty. > > Ok, fair enough, although if you just add a new sysrq option for "what > is running on this tty", would that help resolve this? This is meant for unpriviledged users, unlike sysrq. > > This is much less about "why does my system/kernel seem to hang?" or > > exposing low-level internals (registers, hrtimers, locks, ...), and more > > about "is my SSH terminal session unresponsive?" and "I ran a command, > > it doesn't finish, how's it doing?". > > e.g. A user might want to know if their SSH connection is alive without > > interrupting anything, while having no access both to SysRq and console, > > and no one in fg pgrp actually handles SIGINFO. > > If you have access to a tty, you should have access to sysrq, right? No. This is supposed to work over ssh. SysRq is not supposed to work over ssh; that would be a security hole. Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
