Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:39:19 +0100 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bitstring(9) in kernel. Message-ID: <20040315153919.GC8930@darkness.comp.waw.pl> In-Reply-To: <xzp65d6f8ob.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <20040315143123.GB8930@darkness.comp.waw.pl> <xzpish6f9hb.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040315150248.GL35475@elvis.mu.org> <xzp65d6f8ob.fsf@dwp.des.no>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 04:10:12PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: +> That being said, I have no objection to Pawel's patch. Just want to double check: Should I go ahead and commit it? Or you want think this over? The only user- and kernel-land friendly solution will be to reimplement bit_alloc() as bit_alloc(bits, type, flags). Arguments 'type' and 'flags' will be unused in userland and for userland-only application we can provide bit_ualloc(bits) or something. But this looks a bit hackish. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.FreeBSD.org pjd@FreeBSD.org http://garage.freebsd.pl FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAVc4nForvXbEpPzQRAv1KAKCMIBdjGCTXz15wRUhH4aXsb3RooQCfQeFY fHuyfTWiMFMebUD4yIoPNP0= =RTSx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040315153919.GC8930>