Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 13:20:55 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: chris@calldei.com Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: struct proc Message-ID: <200006262020.NAA16125@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <20000626111453.E20702@holly.calldei.com> References: <3957ABBD.6010407@mail.ru> <20000626111453.E20702@holly.calldei.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20000626111453.E20702@holly.calldei.com>,
Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2000, Fox Anderson wrote:
> > What is the difference between p and curproc in my syscall?
> >
> > static int
> > my_syscall(struct proc *p, my_syscallargs *uap) {
> > curproc->......
> > }
>
> p is the process that made the syscall, curproc is the current
> running process. You should be using p for the process that
> called my_syscall.
Since only one process can enter the kernel at a time (currently),
and p is the process that made the system call, it is also the
current process. I claim that (p == curproc) in this example, and
that it would be better to code with p than with curproc.
John
--
John Polstra jdp@polstra.com
John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA
"Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006262020.NAA16125>