Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:45:43 -0500 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> Cc: bmilekic@technokratis.com, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Changing the names of some M_flags Message-ID: <200012161945.eBGJjh507797@whizzo.transsys.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 Dec 2000 13:34:39 CST." <200012161934.eBGJYdj75335@prism.flugsvamp.com> References: <local.mail.freebsd-net/20001216112130.Y19572@fw.wintelcom.net> <200012161934.eBGJYdj75335@prism.flugsvamp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In article <local.mail.freebsd-net/Pine.BSF.4.21.0012161435130.34015-100000@jehovah.technokratis.com> you write: > > > >On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > >> I think M_DONTWAIT is fine as it was, and M_TRYWAIT instead of M_TRY_WAIT. > >> > >> Leaving it as M_DONTWAIT should reduce the delta by quite a bit and > >> M_TRYWAIT vs M_TRY_WAIT because you have M_DONTWAIT/M_DONTBLOCK. > >> > >> -Alfred > > > > I agree. Anyone else before I re-roll? :-) > > I second Alfred's suggestion. Is this just going to make portablity between the various *BSD kernels more difficult for what's essentially a cosmetic change? I'm thinking of things like KAME, ALTQ, etc. louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012161945.eBGJjh507797>