Quoting Kirill Korotaev ([email protected]):
> >So far you have not addressed the issues of maintaining code in the
> >kernel tree.
> Uhhh... I see that you have no real arguments. Nice.
Au contraire, this is a central issue which you have yet to address.
How do you suggest helping maintainers in the future know which pid they
are working with?
For our vpid patchset we had considered using sparse to make sure that
the real ('kernel') and user ('virtual') pids were never used in place
of each other without going through a conversion. That could be one
solution. Using opaque typedefs is of course another solution. But
suspect there will be places in the code where it simply isn't clear
at first glance which pid you'd want. And if it's not clear at first
glance, then it's likely to be done wrong in at least some of those
places.
-serge
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
