On Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:46:05 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 14:29, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:09:05 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 13:18, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
anyway. Besides all of this - I'm thinking of just
On 30 May 2014 07:57, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ugh. Ok. I was too deep in the trenches of device drivers and other
ancillary things doing bad things to char/short with cpu ids when
walking things. I totally missed kinfo_proc.
I'll go think about it a bit more.
It shouldn't be
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 4:05:49 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 11:44, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 2:24:45 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 10:18, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
It costs wired memory to increase it for the kernel.
On 29 May 2014 13:18, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
anyway. Besides all of this - I'm thinking of just introducing:
typedef uint32_t cpuid_t;
.. then once we've converted all the users, we can make NOCPU
something other than 255 (which is the other limiting factor here..)
Any
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:09:05 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 13:18, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
anyway. Besides all of this - I'm thinking of just introducing:
typedef uint32_t cpuid_t;
.. then once we've converted all the users, we can make NOCPU
something other
On 29 May 2014 14:29, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:09:05 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 29 May 2014 13:18, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
anyway. Besides all of this - I'm thinking of just introducing:
typedef uint32_t cpuid_t;
.. then once we've
