From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jan 21 14:40:25 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A82D537B401 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E75343F13 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.201]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LMeFMW024715; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0LMeOgZ001137; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h0LMeODk001136; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 14:40:24 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: "M. Warner Losh" Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alfre's malloc changes: the next step Message-ID: <20030121224024.GA1095@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20030121.144243.52206100.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030121.144243.52206100.imp@bsdimp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 02:42:43PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In IRC there's much concern over alfred's changes from a cross os > portability standpoint, as well as a SMP standpoint. I'd like to > propose that we do something like the following: [snip] > 4) We back out the bulk of the changes made, except where they were > real bugs. [snip] > > Comments? I tend to prefer a backout as the first step if we like to clean up the M_*WAIT* stuff in a different way. Not reverting first may result in bugs that we're introduced by the first makeover, and then subsequently hidden by the second makeover. I don't say there are any bugs, just that in the case of there being bugs this could happen. Just an observation... -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message