Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:19:58 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha busdma_machdep.c src/sys/alpha/osf1 imgact_osf1.c osf1_misc.c src/sys/cam cam_periph.c cam_sim.c cam_xpt.c src/sys/cam/scsi scsi_cd.c scsi_ch.c scsi Message-ID: <20030122100003.K30758-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030121092713.60586B-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Robert Watson wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > Log: > > Remove M_TRYWAIT/M_WAITOK/M_WAIT. Callers should use 0. > > Merge M_NOWAIT/M_DONTWAIT into a single flag M_NOWAIT. > > Hmm. I guess I missed the discussion; I'm a bit behind on mailing lists. I noticed a null discussion. I didn't respond since I stopped worrying about -current after GEOM made it unusable for me, and the proposed changed was so obviously wrong that Someone Else would respond. > Hmm. I guess I missed the discussion; I'm a bit behind on mailing lists. > To improve code portability and careful thinking by developers, what I'd > like to see is something more like the following: M_WAITOK, which > explicitly requests sleeping indefinitely, M_NOWAIT, which explicitly > requests no sleeping. Rather than a "default" value, a That's exactly what M_WAITOK was supposed to do. Developers just had to think about it since it wasn't really a flag so it was not easy to check automatically. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030122100003.K30758-100000>