Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 14:18:18 +0100 From: Fredrik Lindberg <fli+freebsd-current@shapeshifter.se> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: Travis Mikalson <bofh@terranova.net>, current@freebsd.org, njl@freebsd.org Subject: Re: powerd Message-ID: <43958F9A.2000205@shapeshifter.se> In-Reply-To: <86slt6lb9s.fsf@xps.des.no> References: <43938F61.1050202@terranova.net> <4393F60E.2040106@shapeshifter.se> <86mzjflc97.fsf@xps.des.no> <439495B1.5060305@shapeshifter.se> <861x0qmuen.fsf@xps.des.no> <43956ADF.4050504@shapeshifter.se> <86slt6lb9s.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Fredrik Lindberg <fli+freebsd-current@shapeshifter.se> writes: > >>Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >> >>>If the devd loop is an *alternative* to the polling loop, there's >>>even less reason to use threads. >> >>Yes it's an alternative, reading a variable versus doing a sysctl call >>each interation. It seemed like I good idea, when I first wrote this >>(almost a year ago), to have a thread providing a cached value of the >>AC state. But maybe I was trying to be too smart or something. > > > Yes. Not only is it a bad design idea, but the implementation is > wrong, and likely to fail badly when compiled at high optimization > levels. Ignoring the fact that it does work with -O3 (gcc 3.4.4), could you please explain why it has the potential of failing with high optimizations. Fredrik Lindberg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43958F9A.2000205>