On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, Paul Boven wrote:

> > Jason Thorpe: [ kernel state changes too quickly for one kvm_read() ]
>
> But it would be nice to have the programm not go on chomping on the mp-struct
> if the kvm_read failed and the error message was printed. I'm going to try
> to sneak an else statement into the kvm_read-part. It would of course be
> even nicer if kvm_read simply returned what we asked for.

It may be time to realize that kvm_read() should be depricated.  Atomic
operations on kernel data is just the sort of thing that sysctl() was
invented for, and it would probably be a good idea to implement that in
this case. What does everyone else think?

-J