Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 06:02:21 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Expensive timeout(9) function ? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0401050544030.54854@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20040104205911.S77465@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0401041820230.54854@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> <20040104205911.S77465@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Doug White wrote: > > what reports do you expect with the > > > > "Expensive timeout(9) function" > > > > message ? Why do we see it ? > > You compiled your kernel with 'options DIAGNOSTIC'. Unless you have an > explicit reason for doing so, you should not use this option. I do have. Some people added the code for a special purpose I guess - most likely to identify something ? So the question is what's the purpose and if people who compile with DIAGNOSTIC and see it should they report it and if so what should they report ? -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT 56 69 73 69 74 http://www.zabbadoz.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.53.0401050544030.54854>