On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 10:56:41AM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > > Dmitry Sivachenko writes: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:08:37PM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > > > > > > Dmitry Sivachenko writes: > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > Is there any reason why struct ipc_perm is not protected by #ifdef _KERNE > > L > > > > in ipc.h? Is it supposed to be used from userland? > > > > > > > > > > It's needed by ipcs. > > > > > > > Ah, I see. It is visible via struct msqid_ds. > > > > I developed a patch which requires addition of custom field to ipc_perm. > > I am trying to imagine which problems can it cause to userland programs. > > > > Any ideas? > > > > The usual way to handle this sort of change is to put any new structure > elements at the end so that existing applications don't get confused. > They simply aren't aware the new elements were added.
Yes, that is exactly how I did it. > > Of course, this can cause problems when the kernel does a copyout() > using the new size but the application passed a pointer to > storage which can only hold the old, smaller structure. I didn't guess that. Probably this is why X-server crashed on my machine after that change. Recompilation fixed the problem. Thank you. _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"