Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 23:43:40 +0200
From: Roger Luethi <rl@hellgate.ch>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: nproc: So?
Message-ID: <20040916214340.GA3548@k3.hellgate.ch>
Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040908184028.GA10840@k3.hellgate.ch>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1004
Lines: 19

I have received some constructive criticism and suggestions, but I didn't
see any comments on the desirability of nproc in mainline. Initially meant
to be a proof-of-concept, nproc has become an interface that is much
cleaner and faster than procfs can ever hope to be (it takes some reading
of procps or libgtop code to appreciate the complexity that is /proc file
parsing today), and every change in /proc files widens the gap. I presented
source code, benchmarks, and design documentation to substantiate my
claims; I can post the user-space code somewhere if there's interest.

So I'm wondering if everybody's waiting for me to answer some important
question I overlooked, or if there is a general sentiment that this
project is not worth pursuing.

Roger
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/