Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 15:17:35 +0200 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r211029 - projects/sv/sys/net Message-ID: <AANLkTik2XZT4JHeyUwLMEZJhSZEfm9X_rrsfiF_kNHK=@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100808125531.GA40928@sandvine.com> References: <201008071739.o77HdM2Y009458@svn.freebsd.org> <20100808114725.GA34359@sandvine.com> <AANLkTinmYTxAESx-yg2yzvH6aLP7LQOBV4YrP4CO4Aw4@mail.gmail.com> <20100808125531.GA40928@sandvine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/8/8 Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>: > On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 02:35:53PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote: > >> 2010/8/8 Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>: >> > On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 05:39:22PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: >> > >> >> Author: attilio >> >> Date: Sat Aug ??7 17:39:22 2010 >> >> New Revision: 211029 >> >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/211029 >> >> >> >> Log: >> >> ?? Add a tunable for nd_enable. >> >> ?? As long as TUNABLE_INT is discouraged, however, switch the type int -> long >> >> ?? and adjust accordingly the sysctl stubs. >> > >> > This doesn't really make sense as far as I can tell - and particularly >> > for sysctls, using a long can introduce 32-bit compat issues. ??I'd >> > prefer that this remain an int. >> > >> > What benefit does using a long provide in this case? >> >> Did you see the recent thread on hackers@ about it? >> If we choice to go with a direction on TUNABLES_* I'd prefer to follow it now. > > I just read it now, but I don't see any actual reason to prefer long in > that thread. Probabilly remove the comment would be the best thing then. I'm in favor of it. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTik2XZT4JHeyUwLMEZJhSZEfm9X_rrsfiF_kNHK=>