Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Capability/kobject modifications for comments #239

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

le-jzr
Copy link
Contributor

@le-jzr le-jzr commented Jan 16, 2025

No description provided.

@le-jzr le-jzr changed the title Capability/kobject modifications Capability/kobject modifications for comments Jan 16, 2025
@le-jzr le-jzr requested a review from jermar January 16, 2025 21:45
{
irq_t *irq = (irq_t *) arg;
irq_kobject_t *kobj = (irq_kobject_t *) arg;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For the sake of consistency, irq_from_kobject(arg)?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think also in other places...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, probably. I omitted it here because it's all in the same file, but it makes sense to make it consistent.

@@ -891,6 +883,8 @@ void ipc_init(void)
NULL, 0);
answerbox_cache = slab_cache_create("answerbox_t", sizeof(answerbox_t),
0, NULL, NULL, 0);
irq_cache = slab_cache_create("irq_t", sizeof(irq_kobject_t),
0, NULL, NULL, 0);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, so irq_cache is now a cache of irq_kobject_t objects. Wasn't it the case that before there were also pure irq_t objects not visible by userspace and therefore not referencable by a capability?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, they still exist. They just never used this slab for allocations. I think they are all just static.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@le-jzr le-jzr Jan 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I admit it's mildly confusing, I should probably rename the slab.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants