In article <CADbF7eeDdEFOrk66_VWwpO32DCbJYaLSFwYjw9j8c=mfgqp...@mail.gmail.com>, Masao Uebayashi <uebay...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:21 PM, Masao Uebayashi <uebay...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Masao Uebayashi <uebay...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm too young to understand how signal works in kernel. But I guess >>> I'm not alone. >>> >>> I think that renaming things a bit would help people to understand the code. >>> >>> * >>> - sendsig() -> netbsd_sendsig() >>> - trapsignal() -> netbsd_trapsignal() >>> >>> These are native emul functions of e_sendsig and e_trapsignal respectively. >>> >>> * >>> >>> - postsig() -> sendsig() >>> >>> This is so badly named and incredibly confusing, as these is a >>> function called sigpost() which is completely different. >>> >>> sigpost() posts a signal to a signal queue. sigpost() can be called >>> from anywhere including interrupt context, because all it does is to > >... put a pending signal onto the target's queue. > >- kpsignal2() -> kpsignal() > >The code in kpsignal() filling ksi_fd should belong to >kern_filedesc.c; callers are responsible to fill ksi before calling >kpsignal(). Then kpsignal2() can happily declare it as "kpsignal()". >signal(9) has to follow too. > >(hi xtos)
Hey, I was trying to minimize code changes... :-) Renaming things is fine, but please try not to break it :-) christos
