Re: Character device synchronization with network interface
Re: Character device synchronization with network interface
- Subject: Re: Character device synchronization with network interface
- From: Quinn <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:05:04 +0000
At 16:34 -0800 3/11/04, Jamie Wood wrote:
What will happen to funnels in Tiger?
I believe that some part of the funnel architecture will continue to
exist. For example, VFS plug-ins will be able to set a flag saying
"I'm not fine-grained locking aware", and they'll be protected by a
funnel as they were on older systems. However, I don't think that
this applies to either of your subsystems (character devices and
network drivers).
Would it be better to use locks now, since the code will end up
being more compatible with Tiger?
If I was doing this I'd use funnels now and worry about Tiger when it
ships. Using the funnels is the simple solution, and IMHO there's no
point adding mutex code that may or may not be appropriate for a
future system.
Alternatively, if you have access to pre-release builds of Tiger, you
could just develop for Tiger and ignore older systems entirely.
It really depends on what your product plans are. If you're
developing non-commercially, it makes sense to concentrate on Tiger:
that's where Apple is drawing the binary compatibility line for
KEXTs. If you're developing a commercial product, my natural
inclination is to concentrate on the current shipping system because
that's what your paying customers have. However, it might still make
sense to developer for Tiger if you have a long development cycle.
*shrug*
S+E
--
Quinn "The Eskimo!" <http://www.apple.com/developer/>
Apple Developer Technical Support * Networking, Communications, Hardware
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Macnetworkprog mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden