On 15 November 2010 19:56, Ivan Voras wrote:
> While at it, why not intptr_t? It would be marginally more useful and
> almost free.
Because it can lead to code choices that use the whole 64 bit space
for something other than a single 32 bit integer (say, four 16 bit
words all packed together) wh
On Sat, 21 May 2011, Robert Watson wrote:
In fact, the code I pointed at in my previous e-mail will probably panic in
that case, since it improperly dereferences the inpcb's socket field without
first testing for NULL.
Or, looking more closely, only because the locking is broken, as it does
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Modified: head/sys/sys/socketvar.h
==
--- head/sys/sys/socketvar.hFri Nov 12 12:48:41 2010(r215177)
+++ head/sys/sys/socketvar.hFri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010(r2
On 16 November 2010 02:48, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:33:53AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
>> On 15 November 2010 18:10, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>>
>> > 2. [generic] passing pointers between userland and kernel
>> > requires remapping the pointer when going up or down.
>> > As the map
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 01:33:53AM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 15 November 2010 18:10, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>
> > 2. [generic] passing pointers between userland and kernel
> > requires remapping the pointer when going up or down.
> > As the mapping would be application specific, i don't
> > see m
On 15 November 2010 18:10, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> 2. [generic] passing pointers between userland and kernel
> requires remapping the pointer when going up or down.
> As the mapping would be application specific, i don't
> see much use in allowing room for a pointer without kernel code
> to map user
On 11/15/10 9:10 AM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 12:56:29PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
On 12 November 2010 14:02, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
Author: luigi
Date: Fri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010
New Revision: 215178
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215178
Log:
??This commit implements t
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 12:56:29PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 12 November 2010 14:02, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > Author: luigi
> > Date: Fri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010
> > New Revision: 215178
> > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215178
> >
> > Log:
> > ??This commit implements the SO_USER_COOK
On 12 November 2010 14:02, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> Author: luigi
> Date: Fri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010
> New Revision: 215178
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215178
>
> Log:
> This commit implements the SO_USER_COOKIE socket option, which lets
> you tag a socket with an uint32_t value. The
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> Author: luigi
> Date: Fri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010
> New Revision: 215178
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215178
>
>
> This change adds a field to 'struct socket', but the struct is not
> part of any driver or userland-visible ABI so
Author: luigi
Date: Fri Nov 12 13:02:26 2010
New Revision: 215178
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215178
Log:
This commit implements the SO_USER_COOKIE socket option, which lets
you tag a socket with an uint32_t value. The cookie can then be
used by the kernel for various purposes
11 matches
Mail list logo
