From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 6 18:03:23 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A11CDA9F for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 18:03:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.strugglingcoder.info (strugglingcoder.info [65.19.130.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CE6BCB5 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 18:03:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.1.1.3]) (Authenticated sender: hiren@strugglingcoder.info) by mail.strugglingcoder.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C69710CADC; Mon, 6 Apr 2015 11:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 11:03:22 -0700 From: hiren panchasara To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Puzzled about VFS sysctl OIDs -- signed vs. unsigned (again) Message-ID: <20150406180322.GD96049@strugglingcoder.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1giRMj6yz/+FOIRq" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: mdf356@gmail.com X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 18:03:23 -0000 --1giRMj6yz/+FOIRq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Ran into this issue on a stable/10 box at work and found https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2011-March/034600.html I'd be interested in knowing how other are fixing this in-house (at $work). One suggestion I had was to raise it from int to long but that apparently may have performance impact as these routines get called a lot and needs to be profiled. Making them (at least) unsigned is a good first step. Cheers, Hiren --1giRMj6yz/+FOIRq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJVIsppXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRBNEUyMEZBMUQ4Nzg4RjNGMTdFNjZGMDI4 QjkyNTBFMTU2M0VERkU1AAoJEIuSUOFWPt/lgTgH/2nMFSvuoXJdxgpxptVtwz8S 9E5/vSobDKRKO61bSSTfF5VbCwou+6isxPNVfF3Qv+jA6ox/Gnx6Vs+x8gub2Hdk HsCbM7rGIzZgkTISPCZlhndNNzqE94C2R0zP+Uczu4RN6OOxsnOv3NL0uGCpfH1G PqYOdwBwQ1sC9K9W2Gwhm5BAO9TFWw4rne1GFFsbH6YLXt3ILZ3HJN2kVWRN9U92 CiaDCOu6V+YSIgBoWOU1JEjt/Ufmg/Tn59q4bCT42XioRV9XD8zsZMOXFYTLT4cP m3KdNV3HRlslHBx1Web0mNjX3RZOzF6AiPYg1KfApV7psSlV1g5e2NkIU5JR1tg= =HGtc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1giRMj6yz/+FOIRq--