Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:51:38 -0500 (EST) From: Benjamin Kaduk <bjk@freebsd.org> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removal of kern_xxx() no-at variants. Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1411121449340.27826@multics.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <201411121014.04482.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20141112132451.GM17068@kib.kiev.ua> <201411121014.04482.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 8:24:52 am Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > We have 'fat' KPI for kern_open() and other vfs syscall helpers, after > > the at-version of the syscalls was added somewhere at 8-CURRENT. > > For instance, we provide > > kern_open() and kern_openat(). > > But more, we provide > > kern_stat() > > kern_lstat() > > kern_statat() > > kern_statat_vhook() > > first three being a trivial wrapper around kern_statat_vhook(). > > More, existence of two or (sometimes) three layers around basic > > syscall helper causes issues like r271655 making the argument > > validation split. > > > > Kepping the compat layer was reasonable in 8-CURRENT time when the > > at variants were experimental and patch to add the syscalls was > > already large and error-prone. Now, I think we should shave the > > extra call indirections, it costs nothing at callers and sometimes > > even improves the code. > > The idea sounds fine to me. Note that I only did a glance over the diff > rather than a thorough review. Please do bump __FreeBSD_version along with the change. -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.1.10.1411121449340.27826>