Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:50:25 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        MingyanGuo <guomingyan@gmail.com>
Cc:        delphij@gmail.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Why use `thread' as an argument of Syscalls?
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0606050744190.13542@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <1fa17f810606050044k2847e4a2i150eb934ed84006f@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <1fa17f810606050044k2847e4a2i150eb934ed84006f@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, MingyanGuo wrote:

> Hi all,
>    I  find that  FreeBSD Syscalls  always have an `thread'
> argument, for example, preadv(/sys/kern/sys_generic.c)
> has a `td' argument.  But  some Syscalls may rarely  use
> this argument,  and  thay ( and functions they invoke) can
> get  the  `thread'  who  make  the  Syscall  _easily_  via
> `curthread' macro if  needed. So the `thread' argument
> seems not needed.
>  Can anybody tell me why use `thread' as an argument
> of Syscalls?

You could have asked "why use 'proc' as an argument of Syscalls"
12 years ago (or more).  When the kernel became thread-aware
(almost 5 years ago), most 'struct proc' arguments were changed
to 'struct thread'.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0606050744190.13542>