From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 27 08:03:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 651E5106564A; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:03:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 407118FC08; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:03:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE7546B17; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:03:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:03:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Max Laier In-Reply-To: <200811262208.48429.max@love2party.net> Message-ID: References: <200811262052.mAQKqRN5065921@svn.freebsd.org> <200811262208.48429.max@love2party.net> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (BSF 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r185344 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6 X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:03:24 -0000 On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Max Laier wrote: > On Wednesday 26 November 2008 21:52:27 Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >> Author: bz >> Date: Wed Nov 26 20:52:26 2008 >> New Revision: 185344 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/185344 >> >> Log: >> Remove in6_pcbdetach() as it is exactly the same function >> as in_pcbdetach() and we don't need the code twice. >> >> Reviewed by: rwatson >> MFC after: 6 weeks (*) >> (*) possibly need to leave a stub wrapper in 7 to keep the symbol. > > Won't this affect our ability to build INET6, but non INET kernels? Not > that we currently could, but if we ever wanted to? INET6 already depends on other things in_pcb.c directly, such as in_pcballoc(). The distinction made between struct inpcb and struct in6pcb is artificial, and mostly quite confusing, so we've been gradually eliminating it. It's largely incompatible with the implementation of IPv4 addresses mapped into the IPv6 space, which relies on IPv6 sockets being able to be in IPv4 connection lists, etc. We have long-term plans to eliminate most of the macro aliasing of fields between the one structure. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge