From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Sep 1 20:29:18 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id UAA18662 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 1 Sep 1995 20:29:18 -0700 Received: from aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw ([140.109.40.248]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA18636 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 1995 20:29:07 -0700 Received: (from taob@localhost) by aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA25776; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 11:28:35 +0800 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 11:28:34 +0800 (CST) From: Brian Tao To: FreeBSD hackers , Joerg Wunsch Subject: Re: 16-bit pids? (was Re: 16, 32, and 64bit types?) In-Reply-To: <199509011645.SAA16004@uriah.heep.sax.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 1 Sep 1995, J Wunsch wrote: > > After a PID rollover, the non-uniqueness of the PID namespace can fool > this mechanism. Ah ha, I see now, *ding*. :) Yeah, it does seem a little short-sighted, now that you mention it. ;-) pid_t is a long, but PID_MAX is 30000? Are those other 17 bits used for anything at all? -- Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org