Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:08:57 +0100 From: Jos Backus <Jos.Backus@nl.origin-it.com> To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Dmitrij Tejblum <dima@tejblum.dnttm.rssi.ru>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panic: zone: entry not free Message-ID: <19990223170857.A6208@hal.mpn.cp.philips.com> In-Reply-To: <19990223161625.B10845@bitbox.follo.net>; from Eivind Eklund on Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 04:16:26PM %2B0100 References: <19990223094120.A97001@hal.mpn.cp.philips.com> <199902230909.MAA01169@tejblum.dnttm.rssi.ru> <19990223105939.D97001@hal.mpn.cp.philips.com> <19990223161625.B10845@bitbox.follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 04:16:26PM +0100, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > Somehow this strikes me as a Bad Thing...
>
> It _is_ a bad thing. I've been pondering what to do with the
> intrusive invariant checks - make them dependent on
> INTRUSIVE_INVARIANTS, perhaps?
Depends on how dangerous these invariant violations are, I would think.
Iow, do they justify a panic()?
> That would still make some KLDs incompatible with INTRUSIVE_INVARIANTS, but
> that is probably the best we can do.
At least that way the non-intrusive ones can be left in (and still be useful).
Cheers,
--
Jos Backus _/ _/_/_/ "Reliability means never
_/ _/ _/ having to say you're sorry."
_/ _/_/_/ -- D. J. Bernstein
_/ _/ _/ _/
Jos.Backus@nl.origin-it.com _/_/ _/_/_/ use Std::Disclaimer;
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?19990223170857.A6208>