Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:23:11 -0600 From: Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=C5=82a?= <trasz@freebsd.org> Cc: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sysutils/lsof Author Question (for CLANG).... Message-ID: <6aadce9c231079e0738de9f059625358@webmail.lerctr.org> In-Reply-To: <7662C646-941D-4E94-92C3-444752DF1EF7@FreeBSD.org> References: <5d4c4abe37bd6fffd0c206c1b7b68ce1@webmail.lerctr.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1211071030050.2164@multics.mit.edu> <20121107213917.GD77848@eureka.lemis.com> <cdfb43c5a36fbb113194a9a381a1000b@webmail.lerctr.org> <20121107230034.GF77848@eureka.lemis.com> <509BBEDC.4070103@FreeBSD.org> <7662C646-941D-4E94-92C3-444752DF1EF7@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2012-11-08 09:20, Edward Tomasz Napierała wrote: > Wiadomość napisana przez Andriy Gapon w dniu 8 lis 2012, o godz. > 15:17: >> on 08/11/2012 01:00 Greg 'groggy' Lehey said the following: >>> On Wednesday, 7 November 2012 at 16:35:22 -0600, Larry Rosenman >>> wrote: >>>> On 2012-11-07 15:39, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, 7 November 2012 at 10:32:23 -0500, Benjamin Kaduk >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Once again, attempting to use kernel internals outside of the >>>>>> supported interfaces is just asking for trouble; I do not >>>>>> understand >>>>>> why this message is not sinking in over the course of your >>>>>> previous >>>>>> mails to these lists, so I will not try to belabor it further. >>>>> >>>>> IIRC lsof is a special case that always needs to be built with >>>>> intimate knowledge of the kernel. >>>> >>>> This is VERY true. Since some of the information lsof uses has >>>> no API/ABI/KPI/KBI to get, it grovels around in the kernel. >>> >>> And until those interfaces are provided, I think this is >>> legitimate. >>> If there's anybody out there who hasn't used lsof, you should try >>> it. >>> It's good. >> >> Just curious why lsof can't use interfaces that e.g. >> fstat/sockstat/etc use? >> Those base utilities do not seem to experience as much trouble as >> lsof. > > Note that fstat(8) does not report file paths. On the other hand, > procstat(8) > does. It looks like "procstat -fa" and "procstat -va" together > provide the > same information lsof(8) does; unfortunately there doesn't seem to be > a way > to show a "merged" output for files opened (-f) and files mmapped, > but closed > (-v). Remember also that lsof is portable between MANY flavors of *nix.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6aadce9c231079e0738de9f059625358>