Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:18:48 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf files src/sys/fs/tmpfs tmpfs.h tmpfs_subr.c tmpfs_vnops.c src/sys/i386/i386 bios.c src/sys/ia64/ia64 efi.c sal.c src/sys/libkern memcmp.c src/sys/mips/mips support.S src/sys/sys libkern.h Message-ID: <20080923221848.GA6386@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <20080923171859.S65801@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <200809231446.m8NEkQev007507@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080923171859.S65801@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 05:21:04PM +0000, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > Below you have changed a few places back to actually use bcmp instead > of memcmp. > I see lots of or more places in our kernel using memcmp. Are you > saying that they all need to be memcmp instead of bcmp and had been > unproper results so far I am not saying the memcmp's I did not touch have to be memcmp and cannot be changed to bcmp(). > or is the files down just a random collection > of memcmp->bcmp changes introduced with the same commit? They are not random, but the set of memcmp uses in $ARCH/$ARCH that did not depend on the memcmp behavior, and are pure BSD files and thus bcmp() usage should not upset anyone. I did not touch drivers that may be trying to share code or otherwise have minimal changes. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080923221848.GA6386>