On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:55:05PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 04/22/11 11:10 PM, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> >> When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
> >> to be stored in the data segment and l
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
> to be stored in the data segment and loaded from the file, and also leads
> to worries about later generations inheriting changes across server reset.
>
>
On 04/22/11 11:10 PM, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
>> to be stored in the data segment and loaded from the file, and also leads
>> to worries about later generations
Looks correct (and cleaner) to me.
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Huddleston
On Apr 22, 2011, at 10:19 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
> to be stored in the data segment and loaded from the file, and also leads
> to worries about later
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
> to be stored in the data segment and loaded from the file, and also leads
> to worries about later generations inheriting changes across server reset.
Seems
When kept in the structure, it causes the entire MAXDEVICES * 128 masks
to be stored in the data segment and loaded from the file, and also leads
to worries about later generations inheriting changes across server reset.
textdata bss dec hex filename
Before: 91837 20
