Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:58:19 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: taskqueue_create() name parameter lieftime Message-ID: <201011191158.19118.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4CE6A3B4.2080604@freebsd.org> References: <4CE2771F.8020109@freebsd.org> <201011160827.11628.jhb@freebsd.org> <4CE6A3B4.2080604@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, November 19, 2010 11:20:04 am Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 16/11/2010 15:27 John Baldwin said the following: > > On Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:20:47 am Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> > >> taskqueue_create() documentation never explicitly says this, but current > >> taskqueue_create() implementation just stores a 'name' pointer parameter > >> internally. Thus it depends on the 'name' having a life time encompassing that of > >> the taskqueue. > >> I think that alternatively we could have copied the name (or a portion of it) into > >> an internal buffer. > >> I don't any argument for either approach, just curious which one looks more > >> preferable from general (FreeBSD, kernel) programming practices point of view. > > > > Hmm, in many other places we store a separate copy (e.g. all the interrupt > > code uses separate MAXCOMLEN char arrays to hold names). If that is easy to > > do, that is probably the best approach. > > BTW, tq_name doesn't seem to be used anywhere at all. > Perhaps just drop it? But still could be useful in a debugger, though. If it's not used anywhere I would just drop it. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201011191158.19118.jhb>