> * Stephen McKay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000805 08:49] wrote:
> > Patch 2 is smaller and possibly controversial. Normally bufdaemon and
> > syncer are sleeping when they are told to suspend. This delays shutdown
> > by a few boring seconds. With this patch, it is zippier. I expect people
> > to complain about this shortcut, but every sleeping process should expect
> > to be woken for no reason at all. Basic kernel premise.
> You better bet it's controversial, this isn't "Basic kernel premise"
Actually, that depends. It is definitely poor programming practice to
not check the condition for which you slept on wakeup.
> *boom* *crash* *ow* :)
Doctor: So don't do that.
In this case, the relevant processes just need to learn to check whether
they've been woken in order to die.
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message