From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 11 10:02:39 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 219141065672
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:39 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C73748FC2B
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:38 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.61.3])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4F217104;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2BA2aWi005547;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:36 GMT (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:55:58 +1100."
	<20080311095557.GX68971@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> 
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:35 +0000
Message-ID: <5546.1205229755@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: amd64 cpu_switch in C. 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:39 -0000

In message <20080311095557.GX68971@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>, Peter Jeremy write
s:

>>The only appreciable downside is that it lowers the barrier of entry for
>>modifying a very sensitive piece of code.
>
>IMHO, this isn't a valid reason.  Increasing the both the legibility
>and performance of a very sensitive piece of code is a good thing.
>Having more people understand the code is also a good thing.

This is not a legal inference, and that's exactly the point Jeff made:

Just because it is written in C doesn't mean people will understand
it, it merely means that they will _think_ they understand it.

Nontheless, we have plenty of 
	/* You ARE supposed to understand this */
C-code already, so I don't see it as an objection to Jeff's patch.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.