From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] connector: Added coredumping event to the process connector Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 19:40:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20130316184036.GE24041@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <20130316170348.GD24041@order.stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Jesper Derehag Return-path: Received: from order.stressinduktion.org ([87.106.68.36]:39291 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752097Ab3CPSki (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:40:38 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 05:57:20PM +0000, Jesper Derehag wrote: > > > > Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 18:03:48 +0100 > > From: hannes@stressinduktion.org > > To: jderehag@hotmail.com > > CC: zbr@ioremap.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] connector: Added coredumping event to the process connector > > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:50:50AM +0100, Jesper Derehag wrote: > > > + ev->event_data.exit.exit_code = task->exit_code; > > > + ev->event_data.exit.exit_signal = task->exit_signal; > > > > Do these already contain meaningful values? > > > > I have to admit that they dont.And you are correct, I should add a new event struct specific for the coredump event instead of piggybacking on the exit struct.Will re-submit a patch.. Hm, I am still unsure if such a patch is needed. Couldn't you test for coredump by inspecting exit_code on PROC_EVENT_EXIT?