From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Nov 26 23:43:55 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0E4237B406; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:43:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7680243E88; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:43:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gAR7hiTO059685; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:43:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gAR7hiOH059684; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:43:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:43:44 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Julian Elischer Cc: "M. Warner Losh" , phk@critter.freebsd.dk, rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ABIs and 5.x branch: freeze kernel module ABI at 5.0 or 5.1? Message-ID: <20021126234344.A59511@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20021127.002657.21921523.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from julian@elischer.org on Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:29:04PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:29:04PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: ... > > That's my view as well. However, while we don't want to unduely > > constrain the developers, I think that the project wants to say "don't > > change the ABIs needlessly." Don't resort values just to resort them, > > don't rearrange structure members just because you can, etc. If you > > need to do it for a compelling reason, then that's OK. > > which is why I think we should reserve some fields now... I don't see much need for it. We have a nice infrastructure (m_tags) to carry info together with mbufs. ifnet's can be easily extended in much the same way used by the bridging code (by using the if_index to point into external arrays containing specific extensions); processes/threads/kseg have the extra pointer/room for custom schedulers... I think the usual suspects are all covered. cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message