Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:52:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys _task.h Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728125025.26103B-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <200407281619.i6SGJwTh019305@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040728125025.26103B-100000>