Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Mar 2003 08:15:38 -0500
From:      Jake Burkholder <jake@locore.ca>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Convert process at_foo events to eventhandlers
Message-ID:  <20030324081538.Y76446@locore.ca>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20030321151929.jhb@FreeBSD.org>; from jhb@FreeBSD.ORG on Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 03:19:29PM -0500
References:  <XFMail.20030321151929.jhb@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Apparently, On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 03:19:29PM -0500,
	John Baldwin said words to the effect of;

> I'd like to convert the process at_fork, at_exec, and at_exit
> events to be regular eventhandlers instead.  This way I get to
> leverage the locking of the existing eventhandlers w/o having
> to duplicate it in three other places.  The patch to do this is
> at http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/proc_event.patch.
> Note that the old API (at_foo, rm_at_foo) has been removed as
> I can not easily implement the rm_at_foo functionality using
> eventhandlers since eventhandlers allow for multiple instances
> of a function in a list and use cookies instead of using the
> function pointer directly to remove events.  There is precedent
> for this in that at_shutdown() also died when at_shutdown() was
> converted to an eventhandler.  This patch also defines some
> generic eventhandler priorities so that users of eventhandlers
> don't always have to define new constants for priorities.
> 
> Comments?

Do it!

Jake

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030324081538.Y76446>