Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:56:38 -0500 From: Doug Poland <doug@polands.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 6.0 and "options PREEMPTION" Message-ID: <20051028135638.GC43527@polands.org> In-Reply-To: <20051028140301.X20147@fledge.watson.org> References: <20051028045457.GA44396@polands.org> <20051028140301.X20147@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 02:04:37PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Doug Poland wrote: > > > One of the other nice benefits to the SMPVFS work is that with our > > fully preemptive 6.x kernel, not holding the Giant lock over the > > file system code lets the file system code not only preempt lower > > precedence kernel threads, such as background crypto operations or > > file system operations, but be preempted by more timing critical > > code, such as sound card interrupts, network I/O, and so on. > > > >Does this mean that options PREEMPTION is assumed in 6.0? If not, > >could someone explain or point me to some docs that will help me > >understand. > > In FreeBSD 6.0 and higher, options PREEMPTION appears in the default > kernel configuration (GENERIC). > Thank you > When upgrading from earlier revisions, if you keep the same config > file, you'll need to add it manually. With the advent of "include" > support in newer FreeBSD versions, I find I generally have my own > include file include GENERIC, then add nodevice/nooptions to remove > things I don't want, and device/options to add things I do want. The > I've been using the include technique for some time but was unaware of nodevice/nooptions. Sounds cleaner that commenting out unwanted devices and options. -- Regards, Doug
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051028135638.GC43527>