Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 23:34:57 +0200 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely8.cicely.de> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: "G.B.Naidu" <gbnaidu@sasi.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [REPOST] Re: How do I get port inside kernel.... (fwd) Message-ID: <20000607233457.B98783@cicely8.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <200006072058.QAA72060@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>; from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu on Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 04:58:41PM -0400 References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006071011570.763-100000@pcd75.sasi.com> <20000607220906.A98783@cicely8.cicely.de> <200006072058.QAA72060@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 04:58:41PM -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote: > <<On Wed, 7 Jun 2000 22:09:06 +0200, Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely8.cicely.de> said: > > >> current process? Is it safe if I use proc0 to pass the proc structure to > >> call socreate() and sobind()? How safe it is to use curproc > >> structure? Somebody mentioned that it will not work in interrupt > >> handlers. > > proc0 is passed because I didn't think things completely through when > the socket layer was taught not to accept process arguments. In most > if not all cases the process parameter should be passed as nil, > rather than &proc0, because the code uses this value to determine > whether or not it is safe to sleep. Some of the code, however, is > buggy in that it does not check for a null process pointer and > proceeds to dereference it. Mmmhh - that also means that it is not valid to use proc0 within an upcall function because it may sleep :( Are the fuctions using the same table with proc0 as with nil or must all calls use the same value? -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000607233457.B98783>