----- Original Message -----
Hello Dave,
I was recommended to add the display of ST when using ps -l. Because it
is simple, so I made the patch at first and then talk about the merit of
patch with you.
The display is like below:
crash> ps -l
[100126284069406] PID: 2389 TASK: ffff88047416aa80 ST:IN CPU: 12 COMMAND:
"kondemand/12"
[100126285814043] PID: 795 TASK: ffff880470cb3540 ST:UN CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"jbd2/sda2-8"
[100126284061076] PID: 2377 TASK: ffff88047426c100 ST:IN CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"kondemand/0"
[100126284058337] PID: 70050 TASK: ffff88045beaeac0 ST:RU CPU: 3 COMMAND:
"crash"
[100126285834369] PID: 70781 TASK: ffff88046929e100 ST:RU CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"dd"
...
I think "ps -l", which displays task sorted by last_run/timestamp, is
concerning about the state of the task. Taking it into consideration, on
a live system with original code, we use "ps -l" to show the sorted
tasks at first, then use "ps" to display the state. The two pieces of
information in such situation are not consonant. This is the reason why
ST is needed.
Your patch is unacceptable as-is because it changes the task header display
for *all* context-specific commands, like "bt", "vm",
"files", "task", etc.
But it does make sense that the task's timestamp and its state could
be correlated by "ps -l" output. Maybe something like this, with an
explanation in the ps help page?:
crash> ps -l
[100126284069406] [IN] PID: 2389 TASK: ffff88047416aa80 CPU: 12 COMMAND:
"kondemand/12"
[100126285814043] [UN] PID: 795 TASK: ffff880470cb3540 CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"jbd2/sda2-8"
[100126284061076] [IN] PID: 2377 TASK: ffff88047426c100 CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"kondemand/0"
[100126284058337] [RU] PID: 70050 TASK: ffff88045beaeac0 CPU: 3 COMMAND:
"crash"
[100126285834369] [RU] PID: 70781 TASK: ffff88046929e100 CPU: 0 COMMAND:
"dd"
...
Dave