From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tolga Dalman Subject: Re: proc(5): minor text updates Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:13:37 +0200 Message-ID: <502935C1.60901@googlemail.com> References: <50202153.6030808@googlemail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Cc: linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Michael, On 08/13/12 09:35, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >> while reading the /proc/[pid]/stat part in proc(5), I noticed two minor >> issues that should be fixed: >> >> 1. The text reads: "flags %u (%lu before Linux 2.6.22) kernel flags word >> of the process. For bit meanings, see the PF_* defines in >> ." >> >> PF_* is obvisously wrong. It should be CLONE_*. > > I haven't looked closely, but I think PF_* is correct. Why do you think > it's wrong? To my understanding, flags contains process flags (i.e., CLONE_*), which are defined in . PF_* flags, on the other hand, specify protocol flags. Those are not related to at all, but defined in Best regards Tolga Dalman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html