[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gnumach ChangeLog i386/i386/locore.h i386/i386a... [gnumach-1-branch

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: gnumach ChangeLog i386/i386/locore.h i386/i386a... [gnumach-1-branch]
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 11:51:17 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

Thomas Schwinge, le Thu 24 Jul 2008 12:44:42 +0200, a écrit :
>      extern int copyin (const void *userbuf, void *kernelbuf, size_t cn);
>     -extern int copyinmsg (vm_offset_t userbuf, vm_offset_t kernelbuf, size_t 
> cn);
>     +extern int copyinmsg (const void *userbuf, void *kernelbuf, size_t cn);
> See `i386/i386/locore.S': `copyin' and `copyinmsg' (and same for the out
> variants) already have the same entry points.  Now you also made them
> equivalent at the C language level.  Perhaps just get rid of one of those
> two symbols?  Or was there a real reason to have both functions with
> different C language signatures point to the same implementation?

Oh, how odd.  The only reason I could see would be to have
copyin/copyinmsg differ just by one taking pointers and the other taking
integers, but what was there before Barry's fixes was rather the
converse (i.e. copyinmsg is used on buffers).  I guess we should dig
back further in the history of Mach, there should be a reason which
might bite use in the future.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]