From owner-svn-src-projects@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 8 12:55:33 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F731065676; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:55:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emaste@freebsd.org) Received: from mail1.sandvine.com (mail1.sandvine.com [64.7.137.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826668FC1D; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from labgw2.phaedrus.sandvine.com (192.168.222.22) by WTL-EXCH-1.sandvine.com (192.168.196.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.694.0; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:55:30 -0400 Received: by labgw2.phaedrus.sandvine.com (Postfix, from userid 10332) id 7343A33C00; Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:55:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:55:31 -0400 From: Ed Maste To: Attilio Rao Message-ID: <20100808125531.GA40928@sandvine.com> References: <201008071739.o77HdM2Y009458@svn.freebsd.org> <20100808114725.GA34359@sandvine.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Ed Maste Subject: Re: svn commit: r211029 - projects/sv/sys/net X-BeenThere: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the src " projects" tree" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 12:55:33 -0000 On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 02:35:53PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2010/8/8 Ed Maste : > > On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 05:39:22PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: > > > >> Author: attilio > >> Date: Sat Aug ??7 17:39:22 2010 > >> New Revision: 211029 > >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/211029 > >> > >> Log: > >> ?? Add a tunable for nd_enable. > >> ?? As long as TUNABLE_INT is discouraged, however, switch the type int -> long > >> ?? and adjust accordingly the sysctl stubs. > > > > This doesn't really make sense as far as I can tell - and particularly > > for sysctls, using a long can introduce 32-bit compat issues. ??I'd > > prefer that this remain an int. > > > > What benefit does using a long provide in this case? > > Did you see the recent thread on hackers@ about it? > If we choice to go with a direction on TUNABLES_* I'd prefer to follow it now. I just read it now, but I don't see any actual reason to prefer long in that thread. -Ed