Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:04:51 +0000 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: svn commit: r214409 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <4CCAC673.7070307@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=v6jp0KdMF4PQiW=DDkdZZdTs%2BHwPzMQU0Xx18@mail.gmail.com> References: <201010270232.o9R2Wsu3084553@svn.freebsd.org> <AANLkTi=2dTVmB8Goj%2BNXq4F6SmZBNS3bxn8gLjmQ%2BdfV@mail.gmail.com> <4CC803A8.3040602@freebsd.org> <20101027082122.GD1848@garage.freebsd.pl> <4CC85552.2020100@freebsd.org> <20101027133307.GQ2392@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <AANLkTinzP%2Btj3y%2B-r4-%2BgHgCzg6BJ-ZpWru365zysSEF@mail.gmail.com> <4CC851CC.80509@freebsd.org> <AANLkTikjvMnaLSrc0MWmL5-kMThgBRJ9GDP5ntYUvHsF@mail.gmail.com> <4CC9483C.7050507@freebsd.org> <AANLkTi=v6jp0KdMF4PQiW=DDkdZZdTs%2BHwPzMQU0Xx18@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:54 AM, David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote: >>>> [patch attachment was lost] >>> Ugh... Mailman hates me I guess :(... >>> >>>> on 27/10/2010 19:07 Garrett Cooper said the following: >>>>> How about this patch? I implemented this as a readonly tunable and >>>> I don't think that it's correct to call it a tunable or use >>>> CTLFLAG_RDTUN. >>>> As I understand it is a read-only sysctl. >>> Converted to CTLFLAG_RD. >>> >>>>> sysconf tunable, because (AFAIK) the value that is being tested >>>>> shouldn't change during runtime after the system has been booted up, >>>>> and figuring that the value wasn't going to change it was better to >>>>> lose 4/8 bytes on the kernel stack instead of having to recompute the >>>>> value every time in a function call, with the associated lost heap / >>>>> stack memory in the process, as the assumption is that this libcall >>>>> was going to be called frequently by some programs. >> The patch looks fine to me. ;-) > > If no one opposes the change, could you please commit the patch for me David? > Thanks! > -Garrett > The SC_XXX constants are in rather odd order! > #define _SC_XOPEN_XCU_VERSION 117 /* user */ > #endif > > #if __BSD_VISIBLE > #define _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF 57 > #define _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN 58 > #endif Does someone just want to save some typing for __BSD_VISIBLE ? It is wrong if it this true. Regards, David Xu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CCAC673.7070307>