cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/alpha support.s src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c support.s src/sys/i386/include md_var.h src/sys/i386/isa npx.c src/sys/ia64/ia64 support.s src/sys/powerpc/powerpc bcopy.c src/sys/sparc64/sparc64 support.S ...

Kris Kennaway kris at obsecurity.org
Fri Apr 4 13:26:30 PST 2003


On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 10:22:23AM -0800, David Schultz wrote:
> Thus spake Kris Kennaway <kris at obsecurity.org>:
> > On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 09:29:55AM -0800, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > 
> > >   Define ovbcopy() as a macro which expands to the equivalent bcopy() call,
> > >   to take care of the KAME IPv6 code which needs ovbcopy() because NetBSD's
> > >   bcopy() doesn't handle overlap like ours.
> > 
> > Was this for optimization reasons, hysterical raisins, or some other reason?
> 
> The ovbcopy-->bcopy conversion doesn't make things any faster or
> slower, but it does make some minor optimizations impossible to
> implement in the future.  I'm not sure I agree with the changes,
> but I don't violently disagree either.

I was actually referring to NetBSD's different implementation in my
question.  Sorry, it wasn't clear from my email.  To rephase it, why
do NetBSD have ovbcopy() and bcopy() as separate functions?

Kris

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/attachments/20030404/9e19d5d9/attachment.bin


More information about the cvs-all mailing list