Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:56:51 +0200 From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: kern/159281: [PATCH] Linux-like /proc/swaps for linprocfs Message-ID: <CAOfDtXMh=LBb_PH1H7e02SRU=HRHLPjhZ%2BxVKLTLiee0JQ3yfw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110730173239.GA17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <CAOfDtXOJjOoQA8yNFPVdQRqCqr-Vc5nscMbgOLGLMuvTP9mp1w@mail.gmail.com> <20110730173239.GA17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2011/7/30 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>: > Second, my proposal contains a flaw. Namely, if some swap device was removed > between calls to swap_info and swap_devname calls, we get mangled list. Ok, I see that you fixed this by unifying those functions. > The third problem, which is not fixed, and which I do not want to handle, > is that the swap devices list can be changed between calls to swap_devname(), > changing device indexes and thus making the output mangled. You say you don't want to handle this, but AFAICT from the patch you already did. Or did I miss something? > Should the swap device name be separated from 'unknown' word by > space or by tab ? Linux' /proc/swaps prints spaces after the first column and tabs for the rest. I think it's better to do the same just in case, but I don't think it's relevant either way. > I updated your patch, hopefully fixing the issues. Do you have comments > or objections ? No. Thanks for fixing those problems. -- Robert Millan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOfDtXMh=LBb_PH1H7e02SRU=HRHLPjhZ%2BxVKLTLiee0JQ3yfw>