Re: top: proc summary mismatch

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dmitry Lohansky wrote:
> But is more better mark process as sleeping only if _all_ of this lwps
> are in sleeping state.

I'm not sure.  Maybe we should display all lwps for the time being.  This for sure is an area of discussion.

>  int process_states[6];
>  char *procstatenames[] = {
> -    "", " starting, ", " running, ", " sleeping, ", " stopped, ",
> -    " zombie, ",
> +    "", " starting, ", " running, ", " stopped, ", " zombie, ",
> +    " sleeping, ",
>      NULL
>  };

well caught!

>         {
>             total_procs++;
> +           if (LP(pp, stat) == LSSLEEP)
> +               PP(pp, stat) = SZOMB + 1;
>             process_states[(unsigned char) PP(pp, stat)]++;

I don't really like this.  Maybe something like

int state;

state = PP(pp, stat);
if (LP(pp, stat) == LSSLEEP)
   state = SZOMB + 1;
process_states[state]++;

what do you think?

cheers
 simon

--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature