From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org  Sat Feb 25 15:47:32 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A199CED30A
 for <freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Sat, 25 Feb 2017 15:47:32 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net)
Received: from smtp.vangyzen.net (hotblack.vangyzen.net [199.48.133.146])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B5B175
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Sat, 25 Feb 2017 15:47:31 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net)
Received: from ford.home.vangyzen.net (unknown [76.164.15.242])
 by smtp.vangyzen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BB2156483;
 Sat, 25 Feb 2017 09:47:25 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: procfs ctl interface
To: Eric Badger <eric@badgerio.us>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
References: <451312a7-9ae9-c5a1-4153-2268039c5942@badgerio.us>
From: Eric van Gyzen <eric@vangyzen.net>
Message-ID: <f3d29c53-b947-21a9-769e-e1098039f606@vangyzen.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 09:47:22 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <451312a7-9ae9-c5a1-4153-2268039c5942@badgerio.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 15:47:32 -0000

On 02/24/2017 19:43, Eric Badger wrote:
> I started working on a change that will perturb procfs' ctl interface to some
> degree. In looking closer at procfs, it seems like it has been pretty well
> broken for use as a debugging interface since at least 9.3 (the oldest system I
> have handy). Is there any reason to maintain this interface at all? If anything,
> it should perhaps be made into an alternate front end for ptrace() rather than
> being entirely separate, but I'm not sure I see the value in that.

As I recall, the last in-tree consumer was gcore, but attilio@ switched it to 
ptrace in r199805.

If nobody mentions a significant consumer, garbage-collecting it sounds good to me.

Eric