Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:40:17 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_thread.c src/sys/security/audit audit.c audit.h src/sys/sys proc.h Message-ID: <200602021440.20068.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060202190229.E38507@fledge.watson.org> References: <200602020037.k120b6iM014699@repoman.freebsd.org> <200602021345.38364.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060202190229.E38507@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:03, Robert Watson wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, John Baldwin wrote: > > Have you considered putting td_ar in the logical place in HEAD and only > > doing the ABI-friendly "hack" for RELENG_6? Maybe you could do the ABI > > thing in HEAD to make the MFC easier and then update HEAD after the MFC > > to be more intuitive? > > Yes -- I was actually going to commit it that way, but changed my mind at > the last minute. My reasoning was that if we plan to MFC the changes, it > is better to MFC them having tested them in the form they will be MFC'd. > Once they are MFC'd to RELENG_6, I will move the field back to the zero'd > section and remove the thread constructor hook. Ok, sounds great! -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200602021440.20068.jhb>