On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Julian
> : On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Justin T. Gibbs wrote:
> : >
> : > Then do the right things so it will.
> : Unfortunatly that has been proven to not work.
> : after reverting the change and silently waiting for a week
> : 1/ no person bothered to review it.
> : 2/ people assumed the patch had gone away.
> Ummm, There are reviews in the archives that object to the API as it
> relates to optimization and those objections haven't been sanely
> answered with anything more constructive than "BS".
The primary objections I've seen from Jake, and he posted them as part of
the earlier thread prior to the commit, was that the API changes proposed
by Matt don't make sense for the sparc64 implementation, uni-processor or
multi-processor, and that while these changes might be appropriate for
i386, he wanted to see the APIs set up in such a way that the differences
in architectures were hidden in the MD code. This suggests working some
more on the API before moving on, and my reading of earlier posts in the
thread from John was that that was what he had in mind also.
I don't pretend to understand all the issues here, but I think it's
important to recognize that there have been several coherrent responses to
the current patch that do need to be addressed. I think the preference
I've seen from a number of developers is that the be addressed before the
commit, rather than after.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message