site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com Amanda Walker wrote:
No, they have not. Darwin has never used the "FreeBSD kernel API". At least for network drivers, it was pretty close before the mbuf and ifnet obfuscations were added in 10.4.
Before these obfuscations, I wrote a device driver for an HPC interconnect which does ethernet emulation (really encapsulation) which shared the ethernet driver transmit and receive code between FreeBSD, MacOSX, and Tru64. --Amanda _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... On Dec 15, 2008, at 10:03 AM, Andrew Gallatin wrote: Agreed--the same can be said for most of the IP stack (and as an aside, the effort than went into making the FreeBSD version SMP-aware shows just how much of a downside manipulating kernel structures directly can be--it took a lot of heavy lifting by a lot of people to get rid of that giant lock). And it's still pretty close from a conceptual standpoint. But I don't think the Darwin 8 changes were made out of spite or laziness :-). Interesting. I'd be curious about how extensive the changes were to use through the KPIs introduced in Darwin 8. I haven't had to do that conversion, but just looking at kpi_interface.h, it appears as though the changes would be pretty minimal (ifnet_t and its accessors and mutators strike me as more ecapsulation than obfuscation). This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com