[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: proposal for bus_dma(9) change
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 05:48:46PM -0700, Herb Peyerl wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2009, at 5:26 PM, Andrew Doran wrote:
> >I agree. Do not add new hacks into basic primitives to permit sloppy
> >By all means poison the facility so that it explodes spectacularly
> >when a
> >consumer does the wrong thing. This forces the problem to be fixed
> >by those
> >who want to run with checking enabled and ensures that it's not
> >going to be
> >replicated elsewhere.
> >A number of us have spent a lot of time applying this simple idea.
> >increases the pain level for those running -current but in the long
> >term the
> >result should be a more reliable system.
> >$ grep KASSERT nb4/src/sys/kern/* | wc -l
> > 396
> >$ grep KASSERT nb5/src/sys/kern/* | wc -l
> > 1899
> Sure. I can buy "make it explode in the developers face"... I can't
> buy "let the DMA engine write to a bogus non-zero address if the guy
> is sloppy"...
I have no idea how you made that connection.
Main Index |
Thread Index |