public inbox for linux-man@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* bug in proc(5) manpage
@ 2010-07-28 10:04 Andre Landwehr
       [not found] ` <1280311444.1994.67.camel-cB/ihCqopeGbpGji+OEwdKSq0ejlY3ad@public.gmane.org>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andre Landwehr @ 2010-07-28 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w; +Cc: linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 710 bytes --]

hi,
the man page for "proc" says for the /proc/[pid]/stat files the field
"itrealvalue":

"Since kernel 2.6.17, this field is no longer maintained, and is hard
coded as 0."

Looking at the kernel source[1] however, I see that the field is not
hard coded as 0 but instead has been removed completely. Since this may
result in a one-off when searching for a specific field, it should be
documented correctly.

Best regards,

Andre


[1] compare the relevant file of 2.6.16 and 2.6.17 
    sources:
    http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.16/fs/proc/array.c#L415
    http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.17/fs/proc/array.c#L413


-- 
Andre Landwehr, Ricklinger Stadtweg 42, D-30459 Hannover




[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: bug in proc(5) manpage
       [not found] ` <1280311444.1994.67.camel-cB/ihCqopeGbpGji+OEwdKSq0ejlY3ad@public.gmane.org>
@ 2010-07-28 10:41   ` Andre Landwehr
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andre Landwehr @ 2010-07-28 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w; +Cc: linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 718 bytes --]

On Wednesday, 2010/07/28, 12:04 +0200 Andre Landwehr wrote:
> hi,
> the man page for "proc" says for the /proc/[pid]/stat files the field
> "itrealvalue":
>
> "Since kernel 2.6.17, this field is no longer maintained, and is hard
> coded as 0."
> 
> Looking at the kernel source[1] however, I see that the field is not
> hard coded as 0 but instead has been removed completely. Since this may
> result in a one-off when searching for a specific field, it should be
> documented correctly.

Forget it, the man page is correct. I overlooked the hardcoded "0" in
the format string of the printf. Sorry for the noise.

Regards,
Andre

-- 
Andre Landwehr, Ricklinger Stadtweg 42, D-30459 Hannover




[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-07-28 10:41 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-07-28 10:04 bug in proc(5) manpage Andre Landwehr
     [not found] ` <1280311444.1994.67.camel-cB/ihCqopeGbpGji+OEwdKSq0ejlY3ad@public.gmane.org>
2010-07-28 10:41   ` Andre Landwehr

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox