# Re: \[PATCH 0/24\] kernel: add a netlink interface to get information about processes (v2)

- From: Andy Lutomirski \<luto@amacapital.net\>
- Date: 2015-07-07 16:24:34 
- List: linux-api
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2015/07/4529275
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-api/2015/07/4527771/t.md

```text
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:17 AM, David Ahern [ref] wrote:
> On 7/7/15 9:56 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Netlink is fine for these use cases (if they were related to the
>> netns, not the pid ns or user ns), and it works.  It's still tedious
>> -- I bet that if you used a syscall, the user code would be
>> considerable shorter, though. :)
>>
>> How would this be a problem if you used plain syscalls?  The user
>> would make a request, and the syscall would tell the user that their
>> result buffer was too small if it was, in fact, too small.
>
>
> It will be impossible to tell a user what sized buffer is needed. The size
> is largely a function of the number of tasks and number of maps per thread
> group and both of those will be changing. With the growing size of systems
> (I was sparc systems with 1024 cpus) the workload can be 10's of thousands
> of tasks each with a lot of maps (e.g., java workloads). That amounts to a
> non-trivial amount of data that has to be pushed to userspace.
>
> One of the benefits of the netlink approach is breaking the data across
> multiple messages and picking up where you left off. That infrastructure is
> already in place.
>

How does picking up where you left off work?  I assumed the interface
was something along the lines of "give me information starting from
pid N", but maybe I missed something.

--Andy
```