Hi,
2011/5/8 Jason Hellenthal jh...@dataix.net
List, - Please reply-to freebsd...@freebsd.org
What does it do ?: As stated above, current functionality is undisturbed
while allowing the user to create config's by any name they so desire as
long as it has an extension of .conf, also
This is a change in vein of what I've been doing in the xcpu branch and it's
supposed to fix the issue by the recent commit that (probably unintentionally)
stress-tests smp_rendezvous in TSC code.
Non-essential changes:
- ditch initial, and in my opinion useless, pre-setup rendezvous in
On Friday 13 May 2011 09:43:25 Andriy Gapon wrote:
This is a change in vein of what I've been doing in the xcpu branch and
it's supposed to fix the issue by the recent commit that (probably
unintentionally) stress-tests smp_rendezvous in TSC code.
Non-essential changes:
- ditch initial, and
On Friday 13 May 2011 09:43:25 Andriy Gapon wrote:
This is a change in vein of what I've been doing in the xcpu branch and
it's supposed to fix the issue by the recent commit that (probably
unintentionally) stress-tests smp_rendezvous in TSC code.
Non-essential changes:
- ditch initial, and
on 13/05/2011 17:41 Max Laier said the following:
this ncpus isn't the one you are looking for.
Thank you!
Here's an updated patch:
Index: sys/kern/subr_smp.c
===
--- sys/kern/subr_smp.c (revision 221835)
+++ sys/kern/subr_smp.c
On Friday 13 May 2011 11:28:33 Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 13/05/2011 17:41 Max Laier said the following:
this ncpus isn't the one you are looking for.
Thank you!
Here's an updated patch:
Can you attach the patch, so I can apply it locally. This code is really hard
to read without context.
On Friday 13 May 2011 11:50:57 Max Laier wrote:
On Friday 13 May 2011 11:28:33 Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 13/05/2011 17:41 Max Laier said the following:
this ncpus isn't the one you are looking for.
Thank you!
Here's an updated patch:
Can you attach the patch, so I can apply it
on 13/05/2011 18:50 Max Laier said the following:
On Friday 13 May 2011 11:28:33 Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 13/05/2011 17:41 Max Laier said the following:
this ncpus isn't the one you are looking for.
Thank you!
Here's an updated patch:
Can you attach the patch, so I can apply it locally.
on 13/05/2011 20:13 Max Laier said the following:
Disregard this ... I misread the diff. You are indeed using [2] correctly as
the all-clear semaphore. I still believe, that it is safer/cleaner to do
this spin before releasing the lock instead (see my patch).
Maybe. I consider my approach
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:55:55 - tinderbox 2.7 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:55:55 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sun4v
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:55:55 - cleaning the object tree
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:56:06 - cvsupping the source tree
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:56:06 -
So, am I missing something when removing sun4v or the tinderbox
machine needs to be updated someway?
Attilio
2011/5/14 FreeBSD Tinderbox tinder...@freebsd.org:
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:55:55 - tinderbox 2.7 running on
freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2011-05-14 02:55:55 - starting HEAD tinderbox
11 matches
Mail list logo
