Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:19:27 +0100
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: PATCH for testing 
Message-ID:  <23503.942733167@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 15 Nov 1999 14:13:46 PST." <199911152213.OAA20176@kithrup.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199911152213.OAA20176@kithrup.com>, Sean Eric Fagan writes:
>In article <22209.942703421.kithrup.freebsd.current@critter.freebsd.dk> you write:
>>The p_args.patch patch implements a cache of the commandline arguments
>>in the process structure and makes ps(1) pick it up from there with
>>sysctl rather than by groping around in the target process memory.
>
>I don't think this should go in at all.
>
>It increases the size of the proc structure (thereby affecting _all_
>processes) gratuitously.  While I'm generally in favour of having the process
>arguments kept around, the "BSD way" has been to only examine them in user
>memory, despite that being unreliable and just annoying.
>
>The benefits are fairly minimal, and I don't believe justify the cost
>incurred.

That's fine, you can disable it by setting the sysctl.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?23503.942733167>