Paul Durrant writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > > > It's a fast-track, so there's no voting (yet), but if we were voting, > > I'd be opposed to elevating db_mblk. It just can't work well enough > > to be stable -- you can have multiple mblks that point to the same > > dblk. It's sometimes useful for examining a dump, but that's about > > it. > > I agree that one cannot make arbitrary use of db_mblk since in the > general case it will point to only one of many mblk_ts that may be > linked to the dblk_t. However, in the case of the free_func(), db_ref is > guaranteed to be 1 so db_mblk always points at the one and only mblk_t.
I've never viewed that as a serious limitation. You can always arrange things such that the free_arg is either a structure containing a pointer to the mblk_t or is just the mblk_t itself. > If the general preference is to have the mblk_t passed as an argument to > free_func() then I'm not necessarily against it; I just think it's > slightly pointless in this circumstance. I think the uncomfortable part is that it forever nails down the structure offset and functional behavior for db_mblk, because we can't predict who might be using it. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
