Re: proposal for bus_dma(9) change

[Andrew Doran <ad%netbsd.org@localhost>]

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  
> >coding.
> >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.  
> >It's
> >increases the pain level for those running -current but in the long  
> >term the
> >result should be a more reliable system.
> >
> >Andrew
> >
> >$ 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.

Andrew