Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:36:37 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> To: julian@whistle.com Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, grog@lemis.com, phk@critter.freebsd.dk Subject: Re: Splitting struct buf Message-ID: <99Aug20.101641est.40337@border.alcanet.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990819162240.13522J-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> wrote: >changing both is also a fair idea. >(that way we know that someone looked at ALL the places the present struct >buf is used.. :-) Ignoring the smiley, I think this is probably the best suggestion. It provides a clear `heads-up' for any independent device writers that the usage has changed. There are about 750 references to struct buf in the kernel - missing one would be quite easy. If only one name changes, then POLA would suggest that `struct buf' remain associated with I/O requests (which is the historical and probably most common usage). Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?99Aug20.101641est.40337>