Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 19:30:26 +0800 From: "Howard Su" <howard0su@gmail.com> To: "Alfred Perlstein" <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Review] Remove procfs dependency of truss Message-ID: <f126fae00704040430o4cd2c64fqb0fb0ab387a01bf@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070404101222.GU61362@elvis.mu.org> References: <f126fae00704040118w25a7b291xdcf1b6300bab1ceb@mail.gmail.com> <20070404101222.GU61362@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/4/07, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> wrote: > * Howard Su <howard0su@gmail.com> [070404 01:20] wrote: > > Following the suggestion in idea page, I proposed the attached patch. > > I didn't change any kernel part because I think PTRACE(2) is > > functional although man page didn't document it. > > > > I tested the patch under i386 and amd64 box. The help on testing and > > code review will be appreciated. > > wow, well done! any draw backs to using ptrace over procfs? I didn't see. > > have you tested performance? Not yet. Base on the number of kernel syscall, new implementaion keep in a same level. However ptrace calls has a short code path compare to generic read syscall. I suppose there will be some improvement. Anyway, I will try to get perf data. > > -Alfred > > -- -Howard
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f126fae00704040430o4cd2c64fqb0fb0ab387a01bf>