John Baldwin wrote:
On Sunday 18 December 2005 06:28 am, Nate Lawson wrote:

Scott Long wrote:

Nate Lawson wrote:

njl         2005-12-17 03:57:10 UTC

FreeBSD src repository

Modified files:
  sys/sys              ktr.h
  sys/kern             kern_clock.c kern_switch.c
Log:
Clean up unused or poorly utilized KTR values.  Remove KTR_FS,
KTR_KGDB, and KTR_IO as they were never used.  Remove KTR_CLK since it
was only used for hardclock firing and use KTR_INTR there instead. Remove KTR_CRITICAL since it was only used for crit enter/exit and use
KTR_CONTENTION instead.

Revision  Changes    Path
1.183     +1 -1      src/sys/kern/kern_clock.c
1.118     +2 -2      src/sys/kern/kern_switch.c
1.35      +12 -12    src/sys/sys/ktr.h

Um, I was using KTR_CRITICAL for schedgraph.  It was actually quite
useful.  Compressing the option space only makes the options less
useful.  Surely there has to be a better solution.  Or, at least you
could call for comments before you alter this stuff.

You didn't speak up about that in the previous discussion on arch@,
starting 10/31/2005.  The only comment was jhb@ saying it was not useful
alone, and he's the only one doing work on critical sections lately.


I didn't say to merge it to KTR_CONTENTION, I said to make it use KTR_SUBSYS but have it optional (I just checked the thread, and in my first e-mail I remembered incorrectly) (i.e. put a #if 0 #define KTR_CRITICAL KTR_CONTENTION #else #define KTR_CRITICAL 0 #endif in kern_switch.c). Given Scott's recent changes to schedgraph, it would probably be best to just make then under KTR_SCHED, though maybe have it optional, thus:

#if 0
#define KTR_CRITICAL KTR_SCHED
#else
#define KTR_CRITICAL 0
#endif

or something.

Ok, I committed this.

If you can think of another use for this besides one event (enter/exit),
feel free to add it back.  Or, consider adding KTR_SUBSYS as a one-off
use like KTR_DEV is for other parts of the system.  KTR_CRITICAL would
be conditionally defined as KTR_SUBSYS when needed.


That's what I asked you to do and you ignored that part of what I said. :( It can be ok to have a KTR class limited to a small number of events if those events fire very often which these do. I think you can also make KTR_WITNESS optional and use KTR_SUBSYS as well. (That's also in my original replies.) And I'd still be interested in feedback on my proposal to axe the whole bitmask concept for KTR entirely.

I didn't want to add KTR_SUBSYS or touch KTR_WITNESS when I wasn't sure of all the ramifications. I've got enough free bits now; feel free to continue this if you want.

--
Nate
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to