On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Nate Lawson wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:10:50PM +0100, Martijn Pronk wrote the words in >effect of: > > > > In file included from /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.c:46: > > > > /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.h:174: field `nc_lock' has incomplete type > > > > /home/src/sys/netncp/ncp_conn.h:193: confused by earlier errors, bailing out > > > > *** Error code 1 > > > > > > > > I guess struct lock can't be found. > > > > > > > > I hope someone can do something with this. > > > > > > > > > > Once you change the <sys/lock.h> line in ncp_conn.h to <sys/lockmgr.h>, you > > > will see a lot of struct proc related errors springing up. The motto of this > > > message is, that fixing that line will not make it compile. > > > > > > We need to make sys/netncp use struct thread instead of struct proc. > > > This is easy in some parts of the code, and on some its just a little > > > tricky, but not hard. Somebody did update the prototypes to netncp, but > > > forgot to change the logic, for lockmgr calls, example, its last > > > argument is a struct thread etc. > > > > > > I was going to work on this task at one point in time, but now that my > > > school exam timetable has changed, I will not be able to do it; for the > > > next 2/3 months anyway. > > > > > > If someone wants to give a go at this task, then they are most welcome > > > to take my place. > > > > I thought Julian volunteered to do this a while back. If he is not, I can > > pick this up and make it compile but I have no equipment to test it on. > > It's not so much that I volunteered as I said that I'd help with > thread/proc issues.. > The trouble was that there are places where it used a proc in the old > code, but in some cases it needs to be a proc, and in other cases it now > needs to be a thread. But all they stored was the proc. Also, from > my memories of the code you needed to understand the protocol to know > which needed to be which, and I don't know that protocol. > > In addition whoever does it needs to remember that any structure that > stores a thread poitner is probably in error, as threads > are transient items and any stored thread pointer is probably a wild > pointer within a few milliseconds of being stored. :-)
I'll take a whack at it and send it out by tomorrow, working or not. -Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
