From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 9 22:25:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413FD16A4CE; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:25:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0601243D48; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 22:25:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [66.127.85.93] ([66.127.85.93]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i99MPqWi084464 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 9 Oct 2004 15:25:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <41686584.6070606@errno.com> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:26:12 -0700 From: Sam Leffler Organization: Errrno Consulting User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Macintosh/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff References: <200410091325.i99DPK00097724@repoman.freebsd.org> <4168009A.303@errno.com> <20041009213710.GB8922@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20041009213710.GB8922@cell.sick.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys mbuf.h src/sys/kern uipc_mbuf2.c src/share/man/man9 mbuf_tags.9 X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:25:53 -0000 Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:15:38AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: > S> I don't recall your showing me the change to remove m_tag_free in > S> mbuf.h. These change the semantics of calling m_tag_free--before they > S> called the method pointer, but now they explicitly call the static > S> function which is typically not what is desired. Your original request > S> was solely to expose the _m_tag_free function so that code could access > S> it; but you've done far more than that with this commit. I believe you > S> should revert the API change. > > Sam, I have searched all src/sys for m_tag_free() users. All of them call > m_tag_free() on an mtag that was just allocated several lines before. This > means, that nothing have changed for them. > Yes, I have changed the API, but nothing is affected. And it is important, > that now API is in accordance with OpenBSD's API, from where mtags came > from. This will make porting of things easier. > 1. You changed this without discussion. 2. It breaks the intentional purpose of subclassing the m_tag_free method. 3. Openbsd compatibility is not broken by calling through the method pointer; in fact calling through the method pointer is required to maintain compatbility (think about it). You did not find existing uses of subclassing because I backed out the vlan changes to use a private pool for unrelated reasons. I very very strongly disagree with this change and want it reverted. Sam