Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:50:49 +0100 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Arch <arch@freebsd.org>, Ed Maste <emaste@sandvine.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Adding shared code support for ia32 and amd64 -- x86 sub-branch Message-ID: <3bbf2fe11002240750r69779948icc6d242fce26abc8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201002241041.56118.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <3bbf2fe11002151610l41526f55r5e60b5e46ce42b64@mail.gmail.com> <20100216195440.GF50403@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <3bbf2fe11002240718x5182aa93w5a00c657a0fba5f6@mail.gmail.com> <201002241041.56118.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/2/24 John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>: > On Wednesday 24 February 2010 10:18:34 am Attilio Rao wrote: >> 2010/2/16 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>: >> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:10:37AM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: >> >> The following patch: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/x86.diff >> >> >> >> starts the effort for having a shared sub-tree between amd64 and ia32= . >> >> In this initial pass I putted the low-hanging fruits (bios/cpufreq) >> >> and what my customer was more interested in (isa/*) in order to >> >> kick-off the effort and, in the future, move gradually the code there= . >> >> With the machine/isa/* cleanup about 10 files are trimmed and I'm sur= e >> >> more can be achieved easilly. >> >> There are few things to discuss. One, that I had not necessity to dig >> >> about still, is about how to organize headers (include/). Maybe some >> >> replication ala pc98 may be good. >> >> >> >> The patch is big but it is mostly added and removed files (look at th= e >> >> files.X in order to understand better how files movements happened). >> >> >> >> Hope to see comments and reviews. >> > >> > IMO the diff is unreadable. I suggest to do actual svn cp (not svn mv) >> > operation now, without a review, and post a diff that should be applie= d >> > to x86/ directory, as well as to build glue. >> >> I think that this patch juices out all the relevant part without noise: >> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/x86-2.diff > > I think this looks good. =C2=A0We should likely be unifying the approach = to > suspend/resume for timers across i386 and amd64 btw. =C2=A0pmtimer should= be > available for amd64 as well for example. =C2=A0I'm also not sure if addin= g a resume > method for atrtc means that pmtimer needs to change to not frob the RTC i= n its > suspend and resume methods now as well. Yes, I would do this (and other simple, already compelling, unifications, like the e/rflags one) into further passes. In this case, probabilly, more mealpieces we do the better it is, IMHO. Attilio --=20 Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe11002240750r69779948icc6d242fce26abc8>