Subject: Re: RFC: /kern/summary
To: Brian C. Grayson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Brian C. Grayson <email@example.com>
Date: 03/09/1999 15:56:01
On Tue, Mar 09, 1999 at 01:36:23PM -0800, Colin Wood wrote:
> Brian C. Grayson wrote:
> > /kern/summary (any better name ideas?)
> > Purpose: Provide numerous system statistics in a single file,
> > allowing programs like top, systat, and xosview to grab an
> > atomic snapshot of the state. Hopefully, this will help
> > reduce the number of recompiles of these programs when struct
> > proc changes slightly.
> what about people who want to use top et al. but don't want the overhead
> of adding kernfs to their kernel?
Near the bottom I mentioned that it would be an option to
top/ps/et al on whether to use /proc and /kern, or the old
method. At least that's what the "as an option" was meant to
convey, but it probably wasn't clear to anyone but me!
I have no idea on the size impact now, but I'm hoping that the
cost of /kernfs and /procfs will be small enough that it's not
much of a concern for the _average_ user. FYI, currently, kernfs*.o
is around 11KB on i386, and I plan on basically adding a few
sprintfs to that. /procfs is twice that size. On a 4MB router,
I can definitely see where an extra 32K or so makes a difference
(that's ~1% of all memory!).