patch-2.0.37 linux/fs/proc/array.c

• Lines: 64
• Date: Sun Jun 13 10:21:03 1999
• Orig file: v2.0.36/linux/fs/proc/array.c
• Orig date: Sun Nov 15 21:51:47 1998

diff -u --recursive --new-file v2.0.36/linux/fs/proc/array.c linux/fs/proc/array.c
@@ -60,6 +60,7 @@
 int get_malloc(char * buffer);
 #endif
 
+extern unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *);
 
 static int read_core(struct inode * inode, struct file * file,char * buf, int count)
 {
@@ -409,55 +410,6 @@
 	if (!p || !*p || !(*p)->mm)
 		return 0;
 	return get_array(p, (*p)->mm->arg_start, (*p)->mm->arg_end, buffer);
-}
-
-unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *p)
-{
-	if (!p || p == current || p->state == TASK_RUNNING)
-		return 0;
-#if defined(__i386__)
-	{
-		unsigned long ebp, eip;
-		unsigned long stack_page;
-		int count = 0;
-
-		stack_page = p->kernel_stack_page;
-		if (!stack_page)
-			return 0;
-		ebp = p->tss.ebp;
-		do {
-			if (ebp < stack_page || ebp >= 4092+stack_page)
-				return 0;
-			eip = *(unsigned long *) (ebp+4);
-			if (eip < (unsigned long) interruptible_sleep_on
-			    || eip >= (unsigned long) add_timer)
-				return eip;
-			ebp = *(unsigned long *) ebp;
-		} while (count++ < 16);
-	}
-#elif defined(__alpha__)
-	/*
-	 * This one depends on the frame size of schedule().  Do a
-	 * "disass schedule" in gdb to find the frame size.  Also, the
-	 * code assumes that sleep_on() follows immediately after
-	 * interruptible_sleep_on() and that add_timer() follows
-	 * immediately after interruptible_sleep().  Ugly, isn't it?
-	 * Maybe adding a wchan field to task_struct would be better,
-	 * after all...
-	 */
-	{
-	    unsigned long schedule_frame;
-	    unsigned long pc;
-
-	    pc = thread_saved_pc(&p->tss);
-	    if (pc >= (unsigned long) interruptible_sleep_on && pc < (unsigned long) add_timer) {
-		schedule_frame = ((unsigned long *)p->tss.ksp)[6];
-		return ((unsigned long *)schedule_frame)[12];
-	    }
-	    return pc;
-	}
-#endif
-	return 0;
 }
 
 #if defined(__i386__)