Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 12:20:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Pritchard <mpp@mpp.minn.net> To: taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 16-bit pids? (was Re: 16, 32, and 64bit types?) Message-ID: <199509021720.MAA25544@mpp.minn.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.91.950902112102.25712B-100000@aries> from "Brian Tao" at Sep 2, 95 11:28:34 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brian Tao wrote: > > 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? Which is why I suggested we raise it to 90000. That gives us 3 times as many pids, and is still the same number is digits, so no displays will be affected (e.g. ps). I suspect that the 30000 limit is left over from times gone by when pid_t was not a long. -- Mike Pritchard mpp@mpp.minn.net "Go that way. Really fast. If something gets in your way, turn"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509021720.MAA25544>