Subject: Re: p_flag in struct proc: int -> uint64_t
To: matthew green <email@example.com>
From: Juergen Hannken-Illjes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/09/2006 11:01:25
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 06:57:06PM +1000, matthew green wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:33:01PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 2006, at 6:53 PM, matthew green wrote:
> > >i agree. we should move away from link sets even tho they are really
> > >quite handy...
> > I am ok with keeping them around for kernel-private stuff, i.e. things
> > that will never be able to load as an LKM. But eventually, I'd like
> > the "load as LKM" and "statically compiled into the kernel" code paths
> > to be identical, including the invocation of init and fini routines.
> Agreed. This is what I need them for. The file system transactions are
> helper functions and will probably never be loadable as an LKM.
> hmm? almost all our file systems work as LKM's currently...
Yes -- but these functions may be called outside of file systems.
Juergen Hannken-Illjes - email@example.com - TU Braunschweig (Germany)