 | | Re: My problems with adding a Best Fit algorithm for memory management to kernel/mm.c
|
|
(...) Yeah, very true. Those lines where in there becuase of the error I originally had in my code, but since my code changed (and is correct) those lines are not needed). Thanks Mike (22 years ago, 6-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) I think you are the victim of too much snippage... :-) If you reread the original message, there is indeed mention of adding various Spybot related features but the "non-standard firmware support" was in reference to NQC in general. I assume (...) (22 years ago, 6-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics)
|
| |
| | Re: My problems with adding a Best Fit algorithm for memory management to kernel/mm.c
|
|
(...) BTW, you can delete these two lines of intialization (i.e. lines 12 & 15 in the above function) as the intialized value gets clobbered on finding the first suitable sized block: 12) mm_best_free=ptr; 15) mm_best_free++; //this must point to (...) (22 years ago, 6-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: My problems with adding a Best Fit algorithm for memory management to kernel/mm.c
|
|
(...) Sure thing sorry, the problem was that I had the wrong variable in one of the if statement, I copied it over wrong from my hand-written notes I made of the Alg ===...=== void *malloc(size_t size) { size_t *ptr,*next, bestSize, *mm_best_free; (...) (22 years ago, 6-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) All, I thought that the spybot could not have the firmware replaced. Am I wrong? -Andrea (22 years ago, 6-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics)
|
