Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1998 00:35:49 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, julian@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Don't malloc buf headers (was: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/vn vn.c) Message-ID: <199807050635.AAA28851@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 05 Jul 1998 14:35:40 %2B0930." <19980705143540.B18970@freebie.lemis.com> References: <19980705143540.B18970@freebie.lemis.com> <199807040841.SAA31111@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <19980705143540.B18970@freebie.lemis.com> Greg Lehey writes: : at the end. If this isn't kosher, what method should I use? Hmmm, Solaris has getrbuf(9f) for this sort of thing, but the Solaris DDI/DDK is somewhat weak on "super" buffer operations. I kinda like this. getrbuf says, for those not familiar, get me a buffer header that I can call my own. The driver has more freedom with these bufs than it does with other bufs passed to it in strategy. Maybe not the best way to go, but it is existing practice. A centralized way of doing this would help reduce the number of places that need to change when struct buf changes. It is one of the most fundamental structures to Unix, yet it is radically different on every system I've looked at. Well, besides the old fields, that is... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807050635.AAA28851>