From owner-freebsd-net Sat Dec 16 11:45:53 2000 From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 16 11:45:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (whizzo.TransSys.COM [144.202.42.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ABC837B400 for ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 11:45:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (localhost.transsys.com [127.0.0.1]) by whizzo.transsys.com (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBGJjh507797; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:45:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from louie@whizzo.transsys.com) Message-Id: <200012161945.eBGJjh507797@whizzo.transsys.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Jonathan Lemon Cc: bmilekic@technokratis.com, net@FreeBSD.ORG X-Image-URL: http://www.transsys.com/louie/images/louie-mail.jpg From: "Louis A. Mamakos" Subject: Re: Changing the names of some M_flags References: <200012161934.eBGJYdj75335@prism.flugsvamp.com> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 16 Dec 2000 13:34:39 CST." <200012161934.eBGJYdj75335@prism.flugsvamp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:45:43 -0500 Sender: louie@TransSys.COM Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > In article 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