Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 20:17:56 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@spinner.DIALix.COM> To: shocking@mailbox.uq.edu.au Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: POLL & the Single FreeBSD'r Message-ID: <199704091217.UAA17638@spinner.DIALix.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Apr 1997 20:20:06 %2B1000." <199704091020.UAA00811@mailbox.uq.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
shocking@mailbox.uq.edu.au wrote: > > Pete, if you can figure out a way to have it co-exist with old LKMs > for devices that have the select interface only (I'm thinking here of the OSS > LKM I just purchased), then, in the words of that ad which the HeavensGate > people acted on, > > Just Do It. Yeah, well, that's the thing isn't it... Trying to maintain binary compatability with an older release... :-] The select handler takes an "int" arg, the poll handler takes an "int *" arg. Extending the cdevsw vector is painful.. Still, I guess there's the possibility of doing something cute within devsw_register(), or have a devsw_register2 with some #defines so that the old devsw_register takes an "ocdevsw" table and pads it, the new one takes the extended table, and compile time checking sorts out the mess. ie: something similar to the getvfsbyname() and mount() tweaks. I guess the question becomes, what else is likely to break from a kernel binary compatability perspective soon anyway? Is the LKM likely to "know" about offsets in struct proc etc? These change regularly.. > Stephen Cheers, -Peter
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704091217.UAA17638>