From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jan 8 02:33:19 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id CAA00368 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:33:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from db2server.voga.com.br (db2server.voga.com.br [200.239.39.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA00361 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:33:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from daniel_sobral@voga.com.br) From: daniel_sobral@voga.com.br Received: from papagaio.voga.com.br (papagaio.voga.com.br [200.239.39.2]) by db2server.voga.com.br (8.8.3+2.6Wbeta9/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA11766; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:33:47 -0200 Received: by papagaio.voga.com.br(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.06 (346.7 3-18-1997)) id 03256586.003F818F ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:33:39 -0300 X-Lotus-FromDomain: VOGA To: mike@smith.net.au cc: mike@smith.net.au, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <83256586.003E86D0.00@papagaio.voga.com.br> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:33:32 -0300 Subject: Re: Device Driver Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > This is not necessarily the case. For outbound data, > the call to enqueue the data (at least) will be made > by the sending process. It would not be unreasonable > for the send to block the process until encryption is > completed. > For incoming data, the decryption could be postponed > until the consumer actually reads from the socket, > although as soon as you have a socket in mind you have > access to the proc structure belonging to the socket's > owner. I'm not sure. Most packets will be just routed. > Another alternative would be to create a kernel process > (like the update daemon) which serviced the > encryption/decryption queues. This would give you a > process context on which you could sleep. I'll look into that. > What level are you going to call them from? Network interruptions. It's just that it feels kind of weird splnetting the code even though it's not necessarily network related... > Are you capable of writing queue manipulation code that > can survive interleaved head and tail operations? I intended to use the queue macros, like style(9) advised to. And, yes, I can write that code, but that's still not exactly reentrant, is it? :-) -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) Daniel_Sobral@voga.com.br