Subject: Re: cp_time[] - current "long", should be "u_int64_t"?
To: None <hubert.feyrer@informatik.fh-regensburg.de>
From: Simon Burge <simonb@netbsd.org>
List: tech-kern
Date: 05/29/2000 12:42:49 
Hubert Feyrer wrote:

> > As Jason points out, extensions for per-cpu cp_time[] information
> > would be worthwhile.
> 
> I guess the same will apply for procfs, too?

At a glance, cp_time isn't referenced by procfs...

Simon.