From: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>
To: Rob Pike <robpike@gmail.com>
Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society <tuhs@tuhs.org>
Subject: Re: [TUHS] 4.1c bsd ptrace man entry ("ptrace is unique and arcane")
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 17:46:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190626004603.GG925@mcvoy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKzdPgyUuiXRPo6N59EnjFDE4WgqgtTYbiNWpvGAKNZ6Qd9p9Q@mail.gmail.com>
I'm curious what Rob and others think of the Linux /proc. It's string
based and it seems like it is more like /whatever_you_might_want.
The AT&T /proc that Faulkner worked on was much more narrow in scope,
in keeping with the Unix tradition. The linux /proc was both a way
to dig into kernel stuff and control kernel stuff, it was way broader.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:37:39AM +1000, Rob Pike wrote:
> Peter Weinberger started and Tom Killian finalized a version of /proc for
> the eighth edition that is ioctl-driven. It was done in the early 1980s. I
> don't know where the idea originated.
>
> In Plan 9, we (I?) replaced the ioctl interface, which was offensively
> non-portable.
>
> -rob
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:01 AM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 12:34 PM Norman Wilson <norman@oclsc.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > It's interesting that this comment about ptrace was written
> > > as early as 1980.
> > >
> > > Ron Minnich's reference to Plan 9 /proc misses the mark, though.
> >
> > your comment about my comment misses the mark; I was not talking about
> > the origins of /proc. This is probably because I was not clear and
> > probably because few people realize that the plan 9 process debugging
> > interface was strings written and read to/from /proc/<pid>/[various
> > files], rather than something like ptrace.
> >
> > The first time I saw that debug-interface-in-proc in plan 9, it made
> > me think back to the 4.1c bsd manual ptrace comment, and I wondered if
> > there was any path that led from this man page entry to the ideas in
> > the plan 9 methods.
> >
> > I actually implemented the plan 9 debug model in linux back around
> > 2007, but was pretty sure getting it upstream would never happen, so
> > let it die.
> >
> > ron
> >
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-26 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-25 19:33 Norman Wilson
2019-06-25 19:42 ` Bakul Shah
2019-06-25 20:35 ` Clem Cole
2019-06-25 23:52 ` ron minnich
2019-06-26 0:37 ` Rob Pike
2019-06-26 0:46 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
2019-06-26 0:56 ` Rob Pike
2019-06-26 1:03 ` ron minnich
2019-06-26 1:12 ` George Michaelson
2019-06-26 1:32 ` Noel Hunt
2019-06-26 15:41 ` Theodore Ts'o
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-06-25 2:27 Kirk McKusick
2019-06-25 1:08 ron minnich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190626004603.GG925@mcvoy.com \
--to=lm@mcvoy.com \
--cc=robpike@gmail.com \
--cc=tuhs@tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).