On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:45:07AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: > > On 2017-Feb-28, at 10:13 PM, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 08:31:04PM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > >> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 09:58:39AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: > >>> Thus the PowerMac G5 so-called "Quad Core" is back to > >>> -r313254 without your patches. (The "Quad Core" really has > >>> two processors, each with 2 cores.) > >>> > >> > >> > >> Thanks a lot for testing. I'll have to think what to do with it, worst > >> case I'll #ifdef changes with powerpc. > >> > > > > Should be fixed with r314474. Got a real powerpc to test on (60 cores), > > was able to lock it up in seconds. Now it is perfectly stablle. > > > > -- > > Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com> > > The updated so-called "Quad Core" PowerMac G5 used for > TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 was able to do a self hosted > buildworld buildkernel for -r314479 just fine. >
Cool. > Thanks much for the fixes: Now I can track head again > for powerpc64. > Well it was my breakage to begin with. > > Summary of the transition interval: > > So for powerpc64 (and powerpc?) It is a good > idea to avoid anything that is after -r313254 > and before -r314474 in head. (Would this be > appropriate for a UPDATING notice given its > span?) > > There may be other architectures that might have > a similar status(?): the last fixes involved were > not in Machine Dependent code. (Some architectures > are apparently insensitive to the errors, such as > amd64). > When following current you are expected to be on the newest revision, so I don't think mentioning interim broken releases makes much sense. -- Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com> _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"