Re: suser() API change patch

On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Julian Elischer wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > suser(thread, flag) could still exist (named somthing like suser_flag())
> > if it is used enough to justify it.  My main point is that the flag is
> > rarely used, so the interface shouldn't be bloated to pass it.
> > 
> > Another point: td->td_ucred can only be safely used without locking
> > if td is curthread.  Our current code mostly assumes this.  suser(td)
> > can easily check that td is curthread, but this is a silly reason to
> > use a bloated interface.  It is just bug for bug compatible with passing
> > thread pointers around a lot.
> 
> Bruce does have a point.. 

I'll be the first to admit that.  It actually suggests the API should be:

int	suser(void);			/* implicitly curthread */
int	suser_flags(int flags);		/* implicitly curthread */
int	suser_cred(struct ucred *cred, int flags);



Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[e-mail]      NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message