From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug  7 23:21:06 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF8F1065673;
	Sat,  7 Aug 2010 23:21:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from smtp.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9948FC23;
	Sat,  7 Aug 2010 23:21:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [84.49.246.2])
	by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 232351FFC33;
	Sat,  7 Aug 2010 23:21:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 07D1684525; Sun,  8 Aug 2010 01:21:05 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org>
References: <AANLkTinKaiGFhKRgqQ+Fjm=02VfWCxULe0a68y-PkJx6@mail.gmail.com>
	<86fwyq8rsc.fsf@ds4.des.no> <i3kbis$73l$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<86d3tujh72.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<AANLkTi=puD+-WeZ+FGdtZtw1v+NnGD_htwNa+En9fcML@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 01:21:04 +0200
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=puD+-WeZ+FGdtZtw1v+NnGD_htwNa+En9fcML@mail.gmail.com>
	(Garrett Cooper's message of "Sat, 7 Aug 2010 15:19:37 -0700")
Message-ID: <864of680wv.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Why is TUNABLE_INT discouraged?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2010 23:21:06 -0000

Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav <des@des.no> writes:
> > Perhaps.  I don't remember all the details; I can't find a discussion in
> > the list archives (other than me announcing the change in response to a
> > bug report), but there must have been one, either on IRC or in Karlsruh=
e.
> > In any case, I never removed TUNABLE_INT(), so...
> It does matter for integers on 64-bit vs 32-bit architectures though,
> right

Not sure what you mean.  The original issue was that someone had used
TUNABLE_INT() for something that was actually a memory address.  I
changed it to TUNABLE_ULONG().  Of course, if your tunable is a boolean
value or something like maxprocs, an int is fine - but so is a long.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no