Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:23:02 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys _task.h Message-ID: <4107E0F6.8060902@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728125025.26103B-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728125025.26103B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > >><<On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 08:03:16 -0700, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.ORG> said: >> >> >>>* Maxime Henrion <mux@freebsd.org> [040728 02:19] wrote: >>> >>>>Or have a struct ifnet for kernel and a struct xifnet for userland, as we >>>>do in other places. >> >>>That sounds more correct (xifnet). >> >>No. Everything that would legitimately be available in an xifnet >>structure is already made available through other interfaces. The only >>reason programs might need to look at a struct ifnet is because they're >>mucking about in kernel memory, in which case they need the real one and >>not a "sanitized" version. (This is why I moved struct ifnet to >><net/if_var.h> in the first place.) > > > Some applications and libraries declare their known violation of layering > boundaries in the system by #define _KERNEL. Others structures have > special #define's, such as COMPAT_43, _WANT_UCRED, etc. I'd be happy with > either #define _KERNEL or #if defined(_KERNEL) || _WANT_IFNET. > > Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects > robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research > > I'd be quite happy with #ifndef _KERNEL #error "No user-servicable parts inside" or similar as is in /sys/sys/timetc.h. Either way, pollution bad, fluffy bunnies good. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4107E0F6.8060902>