In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Dillon writes:
> I'm trying to figure out how what started as a fix to a panic turned into
> such a big mess. And I don't even think the panic has even been fixed ---
> it's just been made more obscure.
The panic hasn't been fixed, as has been repeatedly stated, but at least
a SMP machine doesn't panic when you run the 3rd command they teach you in
any "UNIX for dummies" book.
> In otherwords, nothing ps does blocks. I can't imagine how changing
> the way arguments are fetched by encumbering procfs with even more
> junk would generate a sufficient boost in performance to be either
> noticeable visually or worth doing at all.
Matt, lets talk about this when you have examined the code in some detail.
> It would be nice if the procfs panics were fixed, but not at the cost
> of all of this.
The procfs panics are not fixed, I know that Allan Cox has looked at it.
Poul-Henning
--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
