/proc/pid/arch_status Is Coming To Show Architecture-Specific Details Of A Given Task

[phoronix]

Phoronix: /proc/pid/arch_status Is Coming To Show Architecture-Specific Details Of A Given Task

To be exposed via /proc/[pid]/arch_status is a new interface for exposing architectural-specific information for a given Linux process...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ID-Arch-Status

[birdie]

Meanwhile neither top, nor ps can show process architecture (32/64bit) - a feature which has been available in taskmgr.exe since Windows XP 64.

[starshipeleven]

Meanwhile neither top, nor ps can show process architecture (32/64bit) - a feature which has been available in taskmgr.exe since Windows XP 64.

Probably because none cares even on Windows?

Showing the usage of AVX512 instruaction matters, as that's a very heat-intensive instruction.

[jpg44]

Probably because none cares even on Windows?

Showing the usage of AVX512 instruaction matters, as that's a very heat-intensive instruction.

You may not care but others do. It would be interesting to see if a process is 32 bit or 64 bit. The kernel has the information so makes sense to make it available. Sometimes people just want to know out of curiosity

[atomsymbol]

Will AMD/Intel introduce desktop and server CPUs with big.LITTLE cores, where the many (at least 16) little cores will lack AVX, AVX2 and AVX-512?

The kernel will then automatically be moving tasks utilizing AVX instructions to the big cores.

The little cores might have a higher operating frequency than the big cores (contrary to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_bi...mplementations).

[starshipeleven]

You may not care but others do.

All those that can add it or pay to have it added don't care.
I've never seen any argument that supports the need to see the bitness of a process, even on Windows (especially on Windows where it's pretty easy to spot a 32bit application as they go in "Program Files x86").

That's enough to claim none cares in my book.

Random end users don't matter. They never matter. Opensource isn't different.

[fguerraz]

Meanwhile neither top, nor ps can show process architecture (32/64bit) - a feature which has been available in taskmgr.exe since Windows XP 64.

How about:
file -L /proc/$PID/exe

[Compartmentalisation]

All those that can add it or pay to have it added don't care.
I've never seen any argument that supports the need to see the bitness of a process, even on Windows (especially on Windows where it's pretty easy to spot a 32bit application as they go in "Program Files x86").

That's enough to claim none cares in my book.

Random end users don't matter. They never matter. Opensource isn't different.

Weird bubble you live in.

[Volta]

Meanwhile neither top, nor ps can show process architecture (32/64bit) - a feature which has been available in taskmgr.exe since Windows XP 64.

Don't even mention that crap.

[atomsymbol]

Random end users don't matter. They never matter. Opensource isn't different.

You should read the book "Chaos: Making a New Science" by James Gleick.