Subject: Re: ps vs /proc
To: None <email@example.com>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 02/24/2000 01:22:25
>> I still think ps should be less stringent about what it demands of
>> /proc before it's willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.
> Look at the threads in tech-userlevel from March 1999, when I first
> committed the ps /proc fallback. :)
Okay, another one for the private patch tree. Sigh.
> I got the feeling at that time from the discussions that it was
> better to give no information than possibly-erroneous information.
I strongly disagree, because this leaves me with no way to get a
process listing better than "cat /proc/*/status".
> % ps ax
> ps: proc size mismatch (24192 total, 744 chunks).
> ps: /proc exists but does not have a procfs mounted on it.
> ps: fallback /proc-based lookup also failed. Giving up...
> Hm. Line 223 of procfs_ops.c does a strcmp of the returned
> f_fstypename against MOUNT_PROCFS (defined in
> /usr/include/sys/mount.h), which is what failed. It might be
> interesting, if you haven't already upgraded the whole system, to
> have the warning print out what kind of filesystem it _thinks_ it is.
> It'll probably just be "ocfs" or "fs"... :)
Does this help?
[Truly-Delicious - root] 28> df
Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
/wd0a 10786456 2339952 11731952 16%
0 0 0 99%
0 0 0 0%
0 0 0 16268798%
[Truly-Delicious - root] 29> ps ax
ps: proc size mismatch (24948 total, 744 chunks).
ps: /proc exists but does not have a procfs mounted on it.
ps: fallback /proc-based lookup also failed. Giving up...
[Truly-Delicious - root] 30> mount
/wd0a on type (mounted by 20480)
on type (local)
on type (synchronous)
on type /dev
[Truly-Delicious - root] 31>
And yes, there is in fact a procfs mounted on /proc. I haven't touched
the mounts since boot, and fstab says
/dev/wd0a / ffs rw 1 1
/dev/wd0b swap swap sw 0 0
procfs /proc procfs rw 0 0
kernfs /kern kernfs rw 0 0
fdesc /dev fdesc ro,union 0 0
7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B