On Mon, 3 Dec 2007, Andrew Thompson wrote: >>> I would like to give some feedback. I listed the threads of proc 12 which >>> is intr, >>> >>> # procstat -t 12 >>> PID TID COMM CPU PRI STATE WCHAN >>> 12 100003 intr 0 40 wait - >>> 12 100004 intr 0 52 wait - >>> 12 100030 intr 0 16 wait - >>> [...] >>> 12 100036 intr 0 36 wait - >>> 12 100037 intr 0 24 wait - >>> >>> I had expected it to show the thread name such as 'irq14: ata0', is this >>> possible (and a good thing to do)? >> >> I just print out the 'comm' field returned by the generic sysctl, and I >> notice that top(1) with -S is now having the same problem as procstat(1). I >> think this is a kernel bug in how we initialize or otherwise handle thread >> names, and fairly recent, as it's not present on my 7.0BETA2 box. If I had >> to guess, it's that these are now 'true threads' under the single 'intr' >> proc, and that we're not exporting the thread name? > > Changing to ki_ocomm gets the desired result for single and multithreaded > processes. I wonder if we should be renaming ki_ocomm to ki_tdcomm or ki_tdname? Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge > > > Andrew > > Index: procstat_threads.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/usr.bin/procstat/procstat_threads.c,v > retrieving revision 1.1 > diff -u -p -r1.1 procstat_threads.c > --- procstat_threads.c 2 Dec 2007 23:31:45 -0000 1.1 > +++ procstat_threads.c 3 Dec 2007 06:06:46 -0000 > _at__at_ -82,8 +82,8 _at__at_ procstat_threads(pid_t pid, struct kinfo > kipp = &kip[i]; > printf("%5d ", pid); > printf("%6d ", kipp->ki_tid); > - printf("%-20s ", strlen(kipp->ki_comm) ? > - kipp->ki_comm : "-"); > + printf("%-20s ", strlen(kipp->ki_ocomm) ? > + kipp->ki_ocomm : "-"); > if (kipp->ki_oncpu != 255) > printf("%3d ", kipp->ki_oncpu); > else if (kipp->ki_lastcpu != 255) > >Received on Mon Dec 03 2007 - 09:23:16 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:23 UTC