On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 19:08, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Yes, and force users to update procps for no good reason. And "new"
> procps will still need code to deal with get_wchan themselves... Plus
> you loose information by killing get_wchan() -- two different wait
> points in one function seems very possible to me.
- users of 2.5 need a new procps but only wchan is "broken" and
only if CONFIG_KALLSYMS is set anyhow
- I did not kill get_wchan, just do not use it in stat - in fact
I use it in the new wchan approach, too
- its not an issue now because the updated patch (posted 5 days
after this email you are replying to) keeps wchan.
So you got your way. Look at the patch posted 22 Oct. It is now in
2.5-mm.
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:31 EST