Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 14:51:25 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@plutotech.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: callouts in CAM (was Re: cvs commit:) Message-ID: <199709222051.OAA02828@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199709222048.OAA01438@pluto.plutotech.com> References: <199709222040.OAA02694@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199709222048.OAA01438@pluto.plutotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >Couldn't you do this with the old setup as well, since you have access > >to the callouts at boot time in both schemes? > > Sure. You can dynamically add callouts in both the old and new schemes, > but the difference between Bruce's proposal and the current one is > that it is more expensive/difficult to add callouts incrementally after > the system is up (essentially on demand) since you have to reallocate > whole arrays. Fair enough. Does the new scheme allow for dynamic allocation of callouts? I noticed that was on the TODO list for the original authors. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709222051.OAA02828>