Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 18:31:09 -0500 From: Hiten Pandya <hiten@angelica.unixdaemons.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Searching for users of netncp and nwfs to help debug 5.0 problems Message-ID: <20021126233109.GA37462@angelica.unixdaemons.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211261305510.52749-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211261254100.86771-100000@root.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211261305510.52749-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 01:10:45PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote the words in effect of: > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Nate Lawson wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:10:50PM +0100, Martijn Pronk wrote the words in effect of: > > > > In file included from /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.c:46: > > > > /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.h:174: field `nc_lock' has incomplete type > > > > /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.h:193: confused by earlier errors, bailing out > > > > *** Error code 1 > > > > > > > > I guess struct lock can't be found. > > > > > > > > I hope someone can do something with this. > > > > > > > > > > Once you change the <sys/lock.h> line in ncp_conn.h to <sys/lockmgr.h>, you > > > will see a lot of struct proc related errors springing up. The motto of this > > > message is, that fixing that line will not make it compile. > > > > > > We need to make sys/netncp use struct thread instead of struct proc. > > > This is easy in some parts of the code, and on some its just a little > > > tricky, but not hard. Somebody did update the prototypes to netncp, but > > > forgot to change the logic, for lockmgr calls, example, its last > > > argument is a struct thread etc. > > > > > > I was going to work on this task at one point in time, but now that my > > > school exam timetable has changed, I will not be able to do it; for the > > > next 2/3 months anyway. > > > > > > If someone wants to give a go at this task, then they are most welcome > > > to take my place. > > > > I thought Julian volunteered to do this a while back. If he is not, I can > > pick this up and make it compile but I have no equipment to test it on. > > It's not so much that I volunteered as I said that I'd help with > thread/proc issues.. > The trouble was that there are places where it used a proc in the old > code, but in some cases it needs to be a proc, and in other cases it now > needs to be a thread. But all they stored was the proc. Also, from > my memories of the code you needed to understand the protocol to know > which needed to be which, and I don't know that protocol. > > In addition whoever does it needs to remember that any structure that > stores a thread poitner is probably in error, as threads > are transient items and any stored thread pointer is probably a wild > pointer within a few milliseconds of being stored. :-) Changes in ncp_conn.[ch] do not require a lot of netncp-foo. But other modules like ncp_ncp.[ch] might do. Julian's KSE Milestone 2 commit _did_ touch ncp_conn.h and ncp_rq.h. FWIW, some of the code in netncp does not even need a struct proc, but its just there, for some reason. If no one picks this task up, I will eventually get back to it, but not in the next 3/4 weeks or so. Cheers. -- Hiten Pandya (hiten@unixdaemons.com, hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org) http://www.unixdaemons.com/~hiten/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021126233109.GA37462>