Re: /proc/PID/stat breakage [PATCH]

Neil Moore (
Sun, 1 Mar 1998 13:47:03 -0500

> On Sat, Feb 28, 1998 at 05:29:07PM -0500, Neil Moore wrote:
> > Is there any particular reasoning behind the bitmappish TASK_*
> > constants:
> > [SNIP]
> Your patch implies that the state field can only contain a single
> bit, but the TASK_ bit ordering suggests the possibility for
> multiple bit settings. (Uninterruptable running zombie?)
> The switch you patched does not handle such cases.
> However, after checking some uses of the task state it seems
> most checking is done by == or !=...

That's exactly the thing... Things *can't* be in multiple states,
unless something changes in the future (probably involving swapping).
Currently, everything else in the kernel assumes only one bit is set,
so I don't see a problem with proc doing the same.

In addition, any changes to make the state field in /proc/PID/stat
more than one character will require patches to procps.

-Neil Moore,,

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to