Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:59:07 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD virtualization mailing list <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Vimage globals vs structures measurements. Message-ID: <20090204185656.B93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20090204184526.I93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <498414E5.7020904@elischer.org> <4984241B.5010103@elischer.org> <4987548A.7000609@elischer.org> <20090204184526.I93725@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Julian Elischer wrote: > > Hi, > >> If I can get some confirmation of this by others then >> the next step would be to simply remove the VIMAGE_GLOBALS option >> and all the global variables it covers. >> >> At least that's what seems next to me.. > > no, the next step is to bring in the beaf (last step). ... beef ... anyway. The indirection, the real virtualization, the multiple images, ... you count my typos;) > I think we had clearly decided (somewhen, somewho) that we want one > version with all three options at the same time. > Once we are confident, hopefully after a few days at that point, > VIMAGE_GLOBALS will go away. > > So please do not rape that out. In two months there were no real > accidents wrt. VIMAGE_GLOBALS even with all the larger changes that > went in. I think it's safe to keep them another 4-6 weeks. > > /bz > > -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090204185656.B93725>