Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:57:31 +0900 (JST)
From:      Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To:        phk@freebsd.org
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: <sys/queue.h> potential for panic
Message-ID:  <Pine.SV4.3.95.970109083859.16689B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <12720.852123157@critter.dk.tfs.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> 
> TAILQ_REMOVE and STAILQ_REMOVE would panic with a zero dereference
> if you tried to remove something not on the queue.
> 
> Wouldn't it make sense to avoid that, or would the overhead be considered
> prohibitive ?

Extra safety checks in the kernel runtime would be unacceptable for
performance freaks, like me.

A diagnostic would define responsibility at the expense of a little
compile time.

There are three points of view here:

1) Robustness	(poul)
2) Correctness & production binary performance (me)
3) Compile-time performance & less source code (enough people in core)

Regards, Mike Hancock




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.95.970109083859.16689B-100000>