Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:28:36 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_shutdown.c vfs_subr.c Message-ID: <20040715212836.GT95729@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <200407151415.03555.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <20040715050225.GA87532@freefall.freebsd.org> <20040715052941.GL95729@elvis.mu.org> <200407151415.03555.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* 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? :) hugs, -- - Alfred Perlstein - Research Engineering Development Inc. - email: bright@mu.org cell: 408-480-4684
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040715212836.GT95729>