"ps -e" without procfs(5)
trociny at freebsd.org
Sun Oct 16 17:27:30 UTC 2011
I have a patch that makes kvm_uread() read from user space using ptrace(2).
With this change 'ps -e' does not requires procfs(5).
Do you like it or there might be some reasons why it is a bad idea?
Grepping sources it looks like currently only ps uses kvm_getenvv(3) (and thus
Note, when reading from its own user space it just does bcopy(3), so if a
wrong address range is passed to kvm_uread() the program will segfault. Do we
need some protection here and what? Masking SIGSEGV?
More information about the freebsd-hackers