Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:06:14 -0700 From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_shutdown.c vfs_subr.c Message-ID: <40F72A06.7080809@root.org> In-Reply-To: <20040715212836.GT95729@elvis.mu.org> References: <20040715050225.GA87532@freefall.freebsd.org> <20040715052941.GL95729@elvis.mu.org> <200407151415.03555.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040715212836.GT95729@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> [040715 11:56] wrote: >>On Thursday 15 July 2004 01:29 am, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> >>>> Also, why do you copy the proc name to the stack lower in >>>> kern_shutdown.c? Do you fear that the proc might change from >>>> under you when you're at the bottom and you can't therefore >>>> only keep a reference to the proc instead? >>> >>>Because I don't know if the proc will be there after it nukes itself. >> >>They don't nuke themselves, they just go to sleep. A quick look at the code >>would have revealed this. > > y'know what, in the context of fixing a printf I wasn't really > interested in looking that far into the scheduler. A 20 char stack > variable and a string copy at shutdown isn't such a big deal. If it > bugs you guys that much, why don't you just fix it? > > Or are you worried about getting 15 emails about how you inefficiently > printing a non-critical string like I have? :) My concern is that this is an attempt to fix something which is not broken. The proc cannot disappear there, which is what I believe jhb@ was pointing out. What is there to fix? -Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40F72A06.7080809>