From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Nov 2 13: 0:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8215837B403; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 13:00:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA47463; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:53:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:53:21 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: John Baldwin Cc: Garance A Drosihn , Robert Watson , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Kelly Yancey Subject: Re: Changes to suser() and friends In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 Fri, 2 Nov 2001, John Baldwin wrote: > > For compatibility in drivers that call suser() for 4.x and 5.x. I guess also > for the same reason we insist on passing down curthread to syscalls and vops > instead of assuming curthread. > > > I see creeping murk here! > > And if a device driver is calling suser()? This makes that case easier to > maintain for the driver author since the code wont' care if this is a thread or > proc, and so a simple #define suser(x,y) suser(x) can be used to make > -current code work on -stable. I agree in the case of device drivers.. I thought you were indicationg elsewhere.... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message