Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:17:39 -0800 From: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Mikolaj Golub <trociny@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: libprocstat(3): retrieve process command line args and environment Message-ID: <9679EEE4-BE52-493E-9188-CAECEE5E63D3@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201301221648.50747.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20130119151253.GB88025@gmail.com> <201301221201.06290.jhb@freebsd.org> <20130122211743.GA4490@gmail.com> <201301221648.50747.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 22, 2013, at 1:48 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > Well, you could make procstat open a kvm handle in both cases (open a = "live"=20 > handle in the procstat_open_sysctl() case). It just seems rather = silly to be=20 > duplicating code in the two interfaces. More a question for Robert: = does=20 > libprocstat intentionally duplicate the code in libkvm for other = things as=20 > well in the live case? (Like fetching the list of processes?) >=20 It does not actually has a duplicate code, the code for fetching the = list of processes via sysctl is different from the KVM case. The open file = descriptors processing is different as well. Because libprocstat implements almost = the same functionality both for sysctl and mvm backends, it can be used to = analyze both the live system and the kernel crash dumps. The code Mikolaj = proposed only implements the sysctl backend currently, so it does not seem to = have any relation to KVM, so it will be a bit weird to make it open a KVM = handle though it does not use it. -- ST4096-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9679EEE4-BE52-493E-9188-CAECEE5E63D3>