Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:42:42 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: suser() API change patch Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0203261339120.43201-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020326145210.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
suser_td was always a temporary step towards suser(thread, flag) My aim was always to move suser(proc), suser_td(thread) to suser(thread, ...) and suser_xxx(cred, proc, flag) and suser_xxx_td(cred, thread, flag) to something that was not dependent on thread or proc. I whole heartedly agree with this change and see no problems that can't be fixed on the fly.. I've been watchint the P4 commits and haven't seen any problems. I think this is "non controversial" Julian On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, John Baldwin wrote: > The patch at the URL below changes the suser() API as follows. Currently we > have four suser() functions that take the following args: > > suser(proc) > suser_td(thread) > suser_xxx(cred, proc, flag) > suser_xxx_td(cred, thread, flag) > > In the new scheme (which has been approved by Robert Watson and is really > his design) we go back to only two functions like so: > > suser(thread, flag) > suser_cred(cred, flag) > > The changes are mostly mechanical but the patch is a bit big (about 111k) and > touches 139 files. It is at http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/ucred.patch > I'd like to commit it tomorrow barring any comments, objections, etc. > > -- > > John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ > "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0203261339120.43201-100000>