From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Aug 15 08:39:53 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 79A6737B401; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 08:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de (mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de
	[193.174.154.14])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EA87A43FE3; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 08:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de)
Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100])h7FFdov10054;
	Fri, 15 Aug 2003 17:39:50 +0200 (MEST)
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 17:39:50 +0200 (CEST)
From: Harti Brandt <brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
To: Thomas Moestl <t.moestl@tu-bs.de>
In-Reply-To: <20030815153458.GC701@crow.dom2ip.de>
Message-ID: <20030815173749.A92087@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <20030815121010.I97608@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<20030815165603.R92087@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
	<20030815153458.GC701@crow.dom2ip.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: jmg@freebsd.org
cc: sparc64@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Sparc slowdown - problem identified...
X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: harti@freebsd.org
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc <freebsd-sparc64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-sparc64>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:39:53 -0000

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Thomas Moestl wrote:

TM>On Fri, 2003/08/15 at 16:58:44 +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:

[SNIP]

TM>> I can confirm that it helps. I assume that OFW_NEWPCI is currently there
TM>> to allow testing and one day to throw the switch and remove the old stuff?
TM>
TM>Yes.
TM>
TM>> Wouldn't it help to make it the default? Otherwise the testing will be
TM>> rather limited.
TM>
TM>I haven't made it the default because it can require configuration
TM>changes because of the different enumeration, as detailed in the
TM>warning notice in GENERIC and NOTES. I had hoped that making it an
TM>option would allow people could gradually change over their
TM>installations, so that the transition would be more painless.
TM>
TM>I guess I should make it the default soon.

Yes. Write a HEADSUP to the sparc list, wait a couple of days and throw
the switch. Otherwise you'll not get the testing :-|

harti
-- 
harti brandt,
http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private
brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org