Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:25:31 -0500 From: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@unixdaemons.com> To: Jeffrey Hsu <hsu@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Alfre's malloc changes: the next step Message-ID: <20030122162531.B77209@unixdaemons.com> In-Reply-To: <0H94005IYWJT1Z@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net>; from hsu@FreeBSD.org on Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 01:20:59PM -0800 References: <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> <0H94005IYWJT1Z@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 01:20:59PM -0800, Jeffrey Hsu wrote: > I'm going to weigh in here on the side of the all the seasoned BSD veterans > that we should preserve the M_WAIT flag. I like saying M_WAIT when I mean > M_WAIT. I dislike saying 0 when I mean M_WAIT. > > The fundamental problem here is that M_WAIT looks like a bit flag. That > problem should be directly solved by defining it to be a bit flag. There > are no ABI issues with this in FreeBSD 5.x. > > Warner's proposal to automatically detect programming error is also > a good idea. And, that relies on making M_WAIT a bit flag too. > > Let's solve the problem where it really lies by simply making M_WAIT > a bit flag. > > Jeffrey Not one of you has said why you think that the wait behavior should not be the default behavior and why the dontwait behavior shouldn't be treated like an exception. -- Bosko Milekic * bmilekic@unixdaemons.com * bmilekic@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030122162531.B77209>