On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> FWIW, I'm in favor of a pointer argument as well. The way I implemented it
> was actually with a third argument, instead of changing the int to void.
> i.e.:
[...]
> I don't feel too strongly about it either way -- I suppose it's about the
> same
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Dave Baukus wrote:
> All this talk of mbuf prompts me to point a small bug in M_PREPEND that
> was introduced somewhere between 3.3 and 4.0; maybe its also in 5.x.
>
[...]
> If m_prepend() fails then
No longer an issue in 5.0-CURRENT, and I'm looking at versi
On Wed, Jun 28, 2000 at 12:00:50 -0400, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> Dennis writes:
> >
> > Its not really "wonderful" to those that have already implemented something
> > using the old method.
> >
>
> Speaking as somebody who maintains 3 out-of-tree network drivers & a
> bunch of local code, a
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> YES! This is wonderful news.
>
> I started coding device drivers on Digital UNIX and have long missed
> this feature. I can't count the number of times I've gotten 90% of
> the way through doing something with ext mubfs & thought to myself
> "oh
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, Dennis wrote:
> >YES! This is wonderful news.
> >
> >I started coding device drivers on Digital UNIX and have long missed
> >this feature. I can't count the number of times I've gotten 90% of
> >the way through doing something with ext mubfs & thought to myself
> >"oh hel
Dennis writes:
>
> Its not really "wonderful" to those that have already implemented something
> using the old method.
>
Speaking as somebody who maintains 3 out-of-tree network drivers & a
bunch of local code, all of which makes heavy use of external mbufs, I
certainly consider it to be "
>
> Its not really "wonderful" to those that have already
> implemented something using the old method.
>
Unless you get to rip out your own workarounds for the missing functionality
and get someone else to support those for you.
I think I'll call it delegation through innovation. :-)
Kees
At 10:09 AM 6/28/00 -0400, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
>Bosko Milekic writes:
>
> > This code includes all that was discussed in the previous Email, as
> > well as a better/actually working external storage facility for
clusters.
> > Previously, it was very difficult to allocate external stor
Bosko Milekic writes:
> This code includes all that was discussed in the previous Email, as
> well as a better/actually working external storage facility for clusters.
> Previously, it was very difficult to allocate external storage, attach it
> to the mbuf, _and_ as well maintain
9 matches
Mail list logo
