Subject: Re: LKM diff for review
To: None <tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
List: tech-kern
Date: 10/25/2004 17:27:11
--xesSdrSSBC0PokLI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 12:01:14PM +0200, Peter Postma wrote:
> I'm working on cleaning up the LKM code, here's my first diff for review:
> changes the static array to a linked list. I've been running with this di=
ff
> for a while now and had no problems with LKM's so far.
>=20
> Most of the code comes from OpenBSD and there's probably room for
> improvement..

I'd like to see the change split up. You're muddling real feature changes=
=20
(getting rid of the static max) with style cleanups. Please don't. It=20
makes figuring out later why things changed much harder. Some of us=20
actually do use cvs annotate to figure out where changes came from. :-)

Other than that, the only other thing I think you should do is address the=
=20
used/refcnt question. I'm not 100% sure what the best thing to do is.=20
While I think refcounting would be good, the question is how are the=20
references added & deleted. If an LKM can say, "I depend on this LKM,"=20
then they make a lot of sense. Otherwise, it's probably better to leave it=
=20
as a used flag for now.

Take care,

Bill

--xesSdrSSBC0PokLI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD4DBQFBfZnfWz+3JHUci9cRAo0NAJ9KLL8U/pd7ujqEQEz9QJKYm1jrawCXXN5M
JFlE5K8uDjVuBBEz2o0o6A==
=PQAX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--xesSdrSSBC0PokLI--