> > (pad fields left in struct proc to avoid kernel bump)
> 
> Isn't it better to have to bump the kernel version than to waste memory
> (admittedly a tiny amount) on unused (and not likely to ever be used) fields
> in the structure?

The plan is to ride the next version bump.
I'm sure one will come along soon!  They've been like buses recently.
If we don't get 2.0 frozen soon we'll be on 1.6ZZZZZZZZZA...

Actually, even with version bumps, I try to keep fields at the same
offset to help binary compatibility.

I'd also rather have struct proc re-ordered so that certain fields
that 'random' software is likely to need are at small fixed offsets.
(p_pgrp and p_emul spring to mind, now that there isn't a struct user ptr).

	David

-- 
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk