Subject: Re: Integrating securelevel and kauth(9)
To: Elad Efrat <>
From: Bill Studenmund <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/24/2006 14:29:47
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:51:03PM +0200, Elad Efrat wrote:
> David Laight wrote:
> > There is a suggestion that this might involve a double process switch..=
> > I worry about the performance costs of this, and the fact that callers
> > may not be in a position where sleeping is valid.
> I'll admit that I'm not sure where you see a possibility for a double
> process switch to happen so before I can comment on it you'll have to
> elaborate a bit more.

When I first read the proposal, I thought the "default listener" of the=20
original note was running in its own process context, thus you'd have to=20
context switch to it and then back again. I gather David read it the same=

A callback works much better. :-)

Take care,


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)