From owner-freebsd-current  Thu Jul  5  9: 2: 8 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from magnesium.net (toxic.magnesium.net [207.154.84.15])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B53E737B406
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu,  5 Jul 2001 09:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jasone@magnesium.net)
Received: (qmail 96486 invoked by uid 1142); 5 Jul 2001 16:02:17 -0000
Date: 5 Jul 2001 09:02:17 -0700
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 09:01:59 -0700
From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Kernel thread system nomenclature.
Message-ID: <20010705090159.D270@canonware.com>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107021319090.13213-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107021319090.13213-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>; from julian@elischer.org on Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 02:16:16PM -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-current.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-current>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-current>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 02:16:16PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> 
> Almost all of the current 'proc' pointers being passed around the system
> in syscalls will be changed to the #4 item. In addition, most accesses to 
> curproc would point to a curthread (curr-#4) or a curr#3, so the names
> selected will be used a lot.
> The exctent of these edits almost makes it worthwhile to call the #4 item
> 'struct proc' as the size of the diff would be MASSIVLY reduced.. :-).
> (everyhting to do with sleeping, blocking, and waking up would
> avoid changes, and everywhere a syscall passes down "struct proc *p"
> would avoid changes.

I think there is a clear argument for #1 to be "struct proc".  I don't much
care what #2, #3, and #4 are called.

I am of the rather strong opinion that calling #3/#4 "struct proc" is a bad
idea in the long run.  Yes, it would reduce the diffs, but it would be
terribly confusing to those who weren't versed with the development history
of KSEs.

Jason

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message