On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:05:30PM +0200, Justus Winter wrote: > Quoting Samuel Thibault (2013-08-29 00:24:59) > > Mmm, I'm not sure whether we really want to introduce > > proc_set_code/proc_get_code just for killall5. We could just put > > 0x08000000 / 0x09000000 values for non-essential processes. What do you > > think? > > To be honest, I spent most of the time on that part, thinking that the > chances of getting this merged without discussion would improve if I > just implement this instead of providing wrong values to appease > killall5. Also, providing the correct values aligns our procfs more > closely with the Linux one, and that is one of the points of our > procfs, isn't it?
What's the problem with adding support for valid values ? -- Richard Braun
