Subject: Re: kauth sleepability (Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man9)
To: None <elad@NetBSD.org>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <email@example.com>
Date: 07/21/2006 07:46:21
> > isn't it better to do the opposite?
> > ie. callers of kauth_authorize_action should not assume it never sleep.
> given the replacement of suser() with kauth_authorize_action() (or, the
> authorization wrappers) we might have some places where the code
> actually expects it don't sleep, no?
maybe. but it's better to fix them.