Garrett D'Amore writes:
> Mark Johnson wrote:
> > If your not happy with that, how about...
> > bp_copyto - copy into a buf_t
> > bp_copyfrom - copy out of a buf_t
>
> That would, IMO, be better, because it doesn't overlap with the naming
> convention set by copyin/ddi_copyin.
It's a bit better, but the reversed sense of direction -- referring to
the buf_t rather than the context of the executing thread -- still
looks somewhat error-prone to me.
I might have chosen something like "bp_kern2buf" and "bp_buf2kern" to
make the operation clearer, if the standard copyin {to the caller} and
copyout {from the caller} semantics can't be followed for some reason.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
