Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 10:59:55 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: Dan Swartzendruber <druber@kersur.net>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panic: zone: entry not free Message-ID: <199903101859.KAA57042@apollo.backplane.com> References: <199903101649.LAA26851@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <Pine.BSF.3.96.990310120204.26880B-100000@mail.kersur.net> <199903101722.MAA27037@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:We were talking about invariants, which document the conditions which
:nearby code expect and/or cause. To actually check these conditions
:in a production system is a waste of CPU power; their function is to
:define for the developers precisely what the expected outcome of a
:particular operation is, so that new bugs are not introduced when code
:is modified.
:
:-GAWollman
:
:--
:Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same
I would not characterize the use of invariants in production kernels
as being a waste of cpu power... I'm sure there are many people who
are more interested in data integrity then in performance. The use of
inviariants can conceivably catch a problem early that might otherwise
corrupt the system later. On the otherhand, the speeddaemons might not
want either the invariants or the standard sanity checks, in which case
they do not turn on invariant support and they do turn on MAX_PERF ( which
gets rid of most of the standard sanity checks ).
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903101859.KAA57042>