From owner-freebsd-bugs Wed Apr 10 22:52:16 1996 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id WAA09337 for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ki.net (root@ki.net [205.150.102.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA09331 Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:52:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freebsd.ki.net (root@freebsd.ki.net [205.150.102.51]) by ki.net (8.7.4/8.7.4) with ESMTP id BAA22844; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:52:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by freebsd.ki.net (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id BAA02548; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:53:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: freebsd.ki.net: scrappy owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:53:05 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Bruce Evans cc: freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org, hsu@clinet.fi, scrappy@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/528 In-Reply-To: <199604110542.PAA29754@godzilla.zeta.org.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Bruce Evans wrote: > > I guess that putting a TTYHOG/PTYHOG in sys/tty.h wouldn't be > >acceptable to circumvent this problem? I don't assume that pty's > >generate the error that it is we are trying to fix, so seperating the > ^don't > >*HOG defines would make sense, no? > > The limit should be in the tty struct (and vary with the line speed). Ah, that makes sense... > tty.c doesn't know the difference between a pty and a tty, so it has > no way of selection between TTYHOG and PTYHOG. > Actually, my idea was more that in sio.c, you would use the TTYHOG define, and when you were dealing with pty drivers, you would use PTYHOG, but both would be defined (and therefore seperately modified) in tty.h Marc G. Fournier scrappy@ki.net Systems Administrator @ ki.net scrappy@freebsd.org