From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 15 11:11:14 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9DD016A4CE; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:11:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8955C43D48; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:11:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0FJB8ip018847; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:11:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i0FJB8mg018846; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:11:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:11:08 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav Message-ID: <20040115191108.GB3693@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200401151015.i0FAF49u009868@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040115111219.GA20914@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20040115101021.L71463@root.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Nate Lawson Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern init_main.c kern_descrip.c sys_pipe.c uipc_syscalls.c uipc_usrreq.c vfs_syscalls.c src/sys/sys filedesc.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:11:14 -0000 On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 07:17:39PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > Nate Lawson writes: > > A related question, why wasn't sys/bitstring.h used? > > I had no idea it existed... it also seems (to my eyes) suboptimal as > it uses arrays of bytes instead of long. Could you rerun your benchmark using it so we have consistency in the tree?