From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 20:06:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5CB16A4CE; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 20:06:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from cimlogic.com.au (adsl-20-121.swiftdsl.com.au [218.214.20.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C14FC43D3F; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 20:06:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: from cimlogic.com.au (localhost.cimlogic.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by cimlogic.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i2945f8u011735; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:05:41 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: (from jb@localhost) by cimlogic.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i2945drj011734; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:05:39 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from jb) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:05:36 +1100 From: John Birrell To: Tim Robbins Message-ID: <20040309150536.R234@freebsd3.cimlogic.com.au> References: <200403090245.i292j0a6035728@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040309032248.GA88649@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20040309143223.Q234@freebsd3.cimlogic.com.au> <20040309035532.GA88825@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20040309035532.GA88825@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au>; from tjr@freebsd.org on Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:55:32PM +1100 cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: John Birrell cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org cc: John Birrell Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdio _flock_stub.c local.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 04:06:05 -0000 On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:55:32PM +1100, Tim Robbins wrote: > My concern here is that we are slowing down critical paths for the > sake of broken applications that grope around inside FILEs. Why do > we need to support this? Which applications require it, and why? I'm not sure that I agree that applications are 'broken' when they use things that are defined in the header file along with the FILE structure itself. As I said in my previous mail, if you want to improve performance, then remove the locking code from libc completely in the single-threaded case. That will have more benefit than checking a NULL pointer that has to be resolved anyway in order to access the fields it points to. I think you're arguing about just a few instructions on i386. FWIW, I OpenSSL's file BIO with this functionality. -- John Birrell