On 15 April 2010 17:41, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhiteh...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 04/15/10 08:13, John Baldwin wrote: >> >> On Thursday 15 April 2010 6:06:24 am pluknet wrote: >> >>> >>> On 7 April 2010 23:49, John Baldwin<j...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 06 April 2010 11:24:21 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> pluknet wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> the interesting part for me is how to properly assert now a value of >>>>>> >> >> e.g. >> >>>>>> >>>>>> KINFO_PROC_SIZE varying on err.. different COMPAT_FREEBSD32 arches >>>>>> (say, FreeBSD would have _kern_proc FreeBSD32 compat layer for >>>>>> >> >> top/ps/). >> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Probably the cleanest thing would be to set KINFO_PROC_SIZE in >>>>> machine/proc.h instead of where it is now, and then also define a >>>>> KINFO_PROC32_SIZE or something in the same place. Also, that would be a >>>>> really nice feature. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, I think this sounds like the best approach. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Something quick& not clean (well, it passes universe) attached. >>> So, don't shoot me, please ;-). >>> It's unclear how to convert those mips o32/n32/o64/n64 though. >>> I had to make definitions out of _KERNEL visibility as far as >>> <sys/proc.h> is included from<sys/user.h> in !_KERNEL only too. >>> >> >> Just one suggestion: don't make KINFO_PROC32 #define depenedent on >> COMPAT_FREEBSD32. It should just be always defined. I think that is the >> approach Nathan used for the 32-bit ELF machine type. >> > > I agree. There's no harm in making it a global definition. You also need a > KINFO_PROC32 for ia64, which also implements i386 compatibility. Other than > that, the patch looks good to me. > -Nathan >
Thanks for your suggestions. -- wbr, pluknet
KINFO_PROC_SIZE_md.2.diff
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
