Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 03:18:54 +0000 From: Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ndis: fix ugly code Message-ID: <AANLkTi=9MJjqQWYzgqTB=ivdLCVJ5kqFgScMAY1HFFxA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4CABCC67.9070907@freebsd.org> References: <AANLkTinpUmhczHu1mmtuO1BaibSpT1xUG0PY-Km8wHvL@mail.gmail.com> <4CAB9212.4010203@freebsd.org> <AANLkTimWn1q9RJMdXsu44kmwEeTVWEQ%2B1O%2BrT%2BM0puWn@mail.gmail.com> <4CABCC67.9070907@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/6/10, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 10/5/10 5:27 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote: >> On 10/5/10, Julian Elischer<julian@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> On 10/5/10 1:19 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> If clang did not complain, I would probbaly never spot it. >>>> >>>> Patch attached. >>> personally I think you could use kproc_kthread_add so that a single >>> NDIS process had three threads. >> Patch attached. Now we have single "ndis" kernel process with own threads. > I don't know how ndis works. Is it possible that each ndis driver > would have it's own process? or would each instance? > I don't even know if it's possible to run two different ndis drivers > in the same kernel. > if that was the case we'd want to have a different name for each one > so you can tell them, > but I just don't know enough about it. Nothing have changed in funcionality. We are just using kernel thread instead of kernel process.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=9MJjqQWYzgqTB=ivdLCVJ5kqFgScMAY1HFFxA>