From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 13 07:09:11 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 884C5376; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 07:09:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C75778FC0C; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 07:09:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id JAA11293; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:09:08 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1Tj2up-000Mnw-JK; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:09:07 +0200 Message-ID: <50C97F12.9070905@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:09:06 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: svn commit: r244112 - head/sys/kern References: <201212110708.qBB78EWx025288@svn.freebsd.org> <201212121046.43706.jhb@freebsd.org> <201212121658.49048.jhb@freebsd.org> <50C90567.8080406@FreeBSD.org> <50C97A11.10409@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, Alfred Perlstein , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 07:09:11 -0000 on 13/12/2012 08:49 Adrian Chadd said the following: > Let me restate it again. > > We can ship a STABLE kernel with INVARIANTS enabled, and it not be any > less stable than the STABLE kernel is today. STABLE != stable, of course. And it will be much much slower, so no one (of the regular users) would use it. It seems like you are missing a point of KASSERT a little bit, the part why it is a compile-time option and not a run-time thing. -- Andriy Gapon