On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:38:50 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 25 March 2014 12:46, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 23, 2014 4:41:24 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> Hi,
> >> As part of this thread, a whole lot of stuff was thrown around to try
> >> and fix / improve the correctness of this.
> >> But it still happens to me in -HEAD i386. I updated to r263418 and
> >> it's now doing it around 30-50% of the time I resume.
> > Yes, nothing has changed in HEAD.
> >> So, since I really am trying to avoid getting neck deep in learning
> >> (by myself) a new thing right now, would someone be willing to help me
> >> through the process of (a) learning how this is all supposed to work
> >> (which thanks to jhb and bde, I think I've learnt from the posts in
> >> this thread) and (b) some things to try out? I'll be able to report
> >> the results of this pretty quickly.
> > You can try www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/i386_fpu_suspend2.patch. You
> > could have tried the first patch I posted here earlier when I first
> > posted it as well. :)
> There was a lot of chatter, I thought it was prudent to let it all
> settle before jumping in.
You do understand C well enough to fix simple typos? I don't have any
i386 machines around, but I'll work on cross-building.
> --- npx.o ---
> error: declaration of 'union safefpu' will not be visible outside of
> this function [-Werror,-Wvisibility]
> npxsuspend(union safefpu *addr)
> error: implicit declaration of function 'rcr' is invalid in C99
> cr0 = rcr(0);
Probably just need #include <machine/cpufunc.h>
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"