Subject: Re: what is the status of the ktrace-lwp branch?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/30/2005 16:42:56
> 2. I understand where chuq is coming from and I think I agree with him. I
> think that the uio_ is a process wide struct and not an lwp specific one.
> For example, what happens when the lwp exits before the uio is completed?
for aio-like things, i think uio_proc should be changed to vmspace,
and reference to the vmspace should be kept.
> On the other hand, keeping it as uio_proc, would require us to call
> proc_representative_lwp(uio->uio_proc) in a bunch of places; not very
> attractive either.
where is "a bunch of places" for example?
using uio_proc for other than address space is evil, IMO.
if proc (or lwp, or ucred, etc) is really necessary,
it should be passed as another argument. (or curlwp, where appropriate.)