Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 09:28:43 +0200 (MET DST) From: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Subject: Re: shutdown node VS disconnect all hooks Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0405280925170.18426@zeus> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0405271628360.69401-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0405271628360.69401-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Sorry, I just deleted the original mail, so I use Julian's to answer] On Thu, 27 May 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: JE>On Fri, 28 May 2004, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: JE> JE>> So, what about adding one more netgraph method into struct ng_type, say JE>> ng_preshutdown_t? This method is called first in ng_rmnode(), and then JE>> current shutdown sequence is followed. We will set it to NULL in all existing JE>> nodes, and create a method in ng_tee, which calls ng_bypass(). Future JE>> implementations may use this method to send "goodbye" messages down hooks when JE>> shutting down. JE> JE>That sounds like a much better solution. Node shutdown is done in 2 JE>parts just as node connection is done in 2 parts. JE> JE>> And this will be a POLA-friendly solution - we will not lose functionality JE>> of RELENG_4 (which mpd relies on), and we will not break nodes which JE>> rely on current shutdown sequence. JE>> JE>> What's your opinion? If it is positive - I'll send patches. JE>> JE> JE>That is a very workable solution. If you do that, I suppose you need to edit all the nodes, right?. In that case could you please convert the initialisation of the typestructs to use C99 sparse initialisation? In that case future changes will be a good deal easier. harti
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.60.0405280925170.18426>