Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 05:43:28 -0600 From: "A. Wilcox" <AWilcox@Wilcox-Tech.com> To: Olivier Certner <olivier.freebsd@free.fr> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Suppressing the _KPOSIX_PRIORITY_SCHEDULING kernel config option Message-ID: <B8740DAB-1D8A-4929-BCEF-EA8FCC5D629C@Wilcox-Tech.com> In-Reply-To: <5428029.vKySYWdmsc@ravel> References: <5428029.vKySYWdmsc@ravel>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail=_13797DAA-D2CC-42D2-8584-1EC8E74F6E6F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Nov 17, 2023, at 5:12 AM, Olivier Certner <olivier.freebsd@free.fr> = wrote: > [ snip ] >=20 > For all these reasons, I'm planning to just remove = _KPOSIX_PRIORITY_SCHEDULING and have the code it controls always = compiled in. An alternative would be the painful work of determining = what would make sense to fall under this option and effectively = separating the code properly, but I don't think it's worth it, and as = can be seen from above the status quo is not satisfying either. >=20 > Any objections? Or other thoughts? >=20 > Thanks and regards. >=20 > -- > Olivier Certner This was introduced as an option in 1998 for testing. It looks like the last mail to -current about it breaking something seems to have been before the turn of the millennium[1]. -ports mentioned that you need it as a =E2=80=9Cstandard API=E2=80=9D as far back as 2008 and = earlier[2]. My opinion is that this really shouldn=E2=80=99t be an option and = shouldn=E2=80=99t have been since it was stablised somewhere in the Bush administration. Best, -A. [1]: = https://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-current%40freebsd.org/msg01656.html [2]: = https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-March/047585.html= --Apple-Mail=_13797DAA-D2CC-42D2-8584-1EC8E74F6E6F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 <html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; = -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">On Nov 17, = 2023, at 5:12 AM, Olivier Certner <olivier.freebsd@free.fr> = wrote:<br><div><blockquote type=3D"cite">[ snip ]<br><div><div><br>For = all these reasons, I'm planning to just remove = _KPOSIX_PRIORITY_SCHEDULING and have the code it controls always = compiled in. An alternative would be the painful work of = determining what would make sense to fall under this option and = effectively separating the code properly, but I don't think it's worth = it, and as can be seen from above the status quo is not satisfying = either.<br><br>Any objections? Or other thoughts?<br><br>Thanks and = regards.<br><br>--<br>Olivier = Certner<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div><div>This was = introduced as an option in 1998 for testing. It looks = like</div><div>the last mail to -current about it breaking something = seems to have</div><div>been before the turn of the millennium[1]. = -ports mentioned that you</div><div>need it as a =E2=80=9Cstandard = API=E2=80=9D as far back as 2008 and earlier[2].</div><div>My opinion is = that this really shouldn=E2=80=99t be an option and = shouldn=E2=80=99t</div><div>have been since it was stablised somewhere = in the Bush = administration.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>-A.</div><d= iv><br></div><div>[1]: <a = href=3D"https://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-current%40freebsd.org/msg0165= 6.html">https://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-current%40freebsd.org/msg0165= 6.html</a></div><div>[2]: <a = href=3D"https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-March/04758= 5.html">https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2008-March/04758= 5.html</a></div></body></html>= --Apple-Mail=_13797DAA-D2CC-42D2-8584-1EC8E74F6E6F--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B8740DAB-1D8A-4929-BCEF-EA8FCC5D629C>