From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul  1 23:08:57 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E630416A400
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Jul 2007 23:08:57 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Received: from webaccess-cl.virtdom.com (webaccess-cl.virtdom.com
	[216.240.101.25])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98EA813C458
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Jul 2007 23:08:57 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (c-71-231-138-78.hsd1.or.comcast.net
	[71.231.138.78]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by webaccess-cl.virtdom.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
	l61N8sp0010144
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 19:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net)
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 16:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net>
X-X-Sender: jroberson@10.0.0.1
To: arch@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20070701160540.Y552@10.0.0.1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: 
Subject: wakeup_flags patch.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 23:08:58 -0000

http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/wakeupflags.diff

It didn't workout very cleanly since the flags have to go through three 
layers.  I could define wakeup and sleepq flags to be the same and skip a 
bunch of conditionals.  However, we'd then have to know which flags were 
free to use in each case.  Are there any further opinions on the style?

This patch does not include an implementation for WAKEUP_LOCAL.  I'm still 
working on that in SCHED_SMP.  Ironically, it does include an 
implementation for WAKEUP_TAIL, however, I don't have any users of that. 
:-)

Thanks,
Jeff