On 12/17/12 14:02, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 17 December 2012 13:47, Andriy Gapon <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> But you see, the following is still illogical _to me_. > > And this is the core of the problem. > > A lot of developers are interpreting the KASSERT() conditions as an > invariant condition that, if in any way enabled, should be completely > trusted, believed and cause an immediate panic(). > > However, we leave them out on shipping, production kernels. Why's > that? Because the contract here is "the code should never hit these > situations, so we don't bother checking." > > It's totally understandable at this point why there's such a huge > amount of confusion here. On one hand we have a construct that allows > the developer to enforce correct behaviour and panic early if it gets > caught out; on the other hand we totally ignore all of that in > shipping, production kernels. > > Why are they there, if we just ship production releases with > INVARIANTS disabled?
Read the section titled "NOTE TO PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT FreeBSD 10.x IS SLOW:" in /usr/src/UPDATING if you're wondering why. Regards, Navdeep _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
