From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 31 14:12:47 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E62972 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:12:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4501988 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r0VECjtk047933; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:12:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) with ESMTP id r0VECiXN047930; Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:12:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:12:44 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block To: Andrew Subject: Re: disk wait mystery In-Reply-To: <8EF6F73D-05AF-4E04-968B-84F35CD0FD85@ugh.net.au> Message-ID: References: <20130130001849.7669e033@ivory.lan> <20130130053729.0c9e018f@ivory.lan> <20130130110529.5c5df516@ivory.lan> <8EF6F73D-05AF-4E04-968B-84F35CD0FD85@ugh.net.au> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:12:45 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, Brett Wynkoop , Ronald Klop X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:12:47 -0000 On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew wrote: > On 30 Jan 2013, at 17:05, Brett Wynkoop wrote: > >> I appreciate the education on this point! I wonder if this should be >> considered a man page bug? > > The man page does say "(or other short term, uninterruptible) wait". I > don't know what sort of wait the kernel threads may or may not be in > but if they are in one, and its short-term then the man page is > correct. Maybe an FAQ entry though. If the man page is misleading or incomplete, it should be fixed. Based on the source, the mention of disk at the start is misleading. Maybe: D Marks a process in short term, uninterruptible wait. Or D Marks a process in short term, uninterruptible wait (typically, disk wait). Which explains the "D" but may reintroduce the confusion.