Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:36:48 +0100 From: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> To: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r190105 - head/sys/sparc64/sparc64 Message-ID: <20090320133648.GE59320@alchemy.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <31910B64-3437-4C1D-8234-FC6A1C3D4F8B@mac.com> References: <200903192040.n2JKeoYY075200@svn.freebsd.org> <31910B64-3437-4C1D-8234-FC6A1C3D4F8B@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 05:06:52PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > On Mar 19, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > >Author: marius > >Date: Thu Mar 19 20:40:49 2009 > >New Revision: 190105 > >URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/190105 > > > >Log: > > There's no need to wrap kdb_enter() in #ifdef KDB as it's always > >available. > > That's not quite how it works. > > option KDB is used to build the kernel with debugging features > that could impact performance, security and/or functionality. > In this case it's not so much a matter of whether kdb_enter() > is defined or not, but rather whether the kernel should respect > -d. > That's generally true but the places where I removed #ifdef KDB don't have an impact on security, performance doesn't matter and -d still does nothing if there's no debugger available (which in turn would require options KDB, at least according to documentation). I'm not sure what your're actually trying to say; following your logic strictly would mean that subr_kdb.c shouldn't be standard but only compiled in when options KDB is present. Marius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090320133648.GE59320>