Matthew Dillon wrote:
:See this patch: I think it adds too much churd. Mind you, we can't
:access p_comm anymore, we always have to find "some" lwp in proc to get
:the comm, and this seems backwards. I can commit this to remove p_comm,
:but I am still feeling that we shouldn't do this.
:
:cheers
: simon
Yah, that's too messy. We absolutely can't be dereferencing the
lwp with LIST_FIRST that way.
Yes, the point here is that as long as threads are described properly in
output from
commands like ps and top, it's all good. The internals should not be
major pain in
the ass. I am fine with either way this is done, since I added the field
in the first
place because I was getting annoyed with threads not displaying their name
in the
output of top and ps.
Simon is doing some quality work. Kudos to him.
Hiten Pandya
hmp at dragonflybsd.org
