On Mar 5, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Ryota Ozaki <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Matt Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mar 5, 2014, at 7:33 PM, Ryota Ozaki <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Matt Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:12 AM, Ryota Ozaki <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> - Replace cpu_id with cpuid in sys/arch/arm >>>>> - Can I commit the change? >>>> >>>> Why? It's just churn for no reason I can see. >>> >>> The background is that cpu_id in sys/arch/arm conflicts with >>> the code in cddl and we have to change either one. I and christos >>> (he already replied in another mail) decided to change >>> sys/arch/arm, which seems less pain. >> >> The problem is that all the functions in cpufunc.h are cpu_xxx >> cpuid would be an outlier. >> >> I think a better solution might be to put a field for dtrace >> into cpu_data and just curcpu()->ci_dtraceinfo->foo >> to get to it instead have a parallel structure. >> >> You want to put a dtrace in mi_attach_cpu to initialize/allocate it. > > Sounds reasonable (except that it needs to modify cddl much though). > Can we do attach_cpu in a module?
Too late for the most part.
