Re: kcore patches (was Re: 2.6.32 -mm merge plans)

[AmÃrico Wang]

2009/9/16 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Amï+1rico_Wang ãããæããããï
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Andrew Morton
>> <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>#kcore-fix-proc-kcores-statst_size.patch: is it right?
>>>kcore-fix-proc-kcores-statst_size.patch
>>
>> Hmm, I think KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki's patchset is a much better fix for this.
>> Hiroyuki?
>>
> Hmm ? My set is not agaisnt "file size" of /proc/kcore.
>
> One problem of this patch is..this makes size of /proc/kcore as 0 bytes.
> Then, objdump cannot read this. (it checks file size.)
> readelf can read this. (it ignores file size.)

Hmm, ok.


>
> I wonder what you mention is.... because we know precise kclist_xxx
> after my series, we can calculate kcore's size in precise by
> get_kcore_size().


Yeah, that is why I think your patchset for kcore can replace this.

>
> It seems /proc's inode->i_size is "static" and we cannot
> provides return value of get_kcore_size() directly. It may need
> some work and should depends on my kclist_xxx patch sets which are not
> in merge candidates. If you can wait, I'll do some work for fixing this
> problem. (but will not be able to merge directly against upstream.)
>
> But for now, we have to use some fixed value....and using above
> patch for 2.6.31 is not very bad.


Just saw your new patchset for this, I will review them.

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