Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:28:25 -0800 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r310336 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <148295416.6HGrYZ2Ojd@ralph.baldwin.cx> In-Reply-To: <d3bc46ff-7ecb-703c-4a0a-ebf5c31682e5@freebsd.org> References: <201612201944.uBKJiiMg034231@repo.freebsd.org> <d3bc46ff-7ecb-703c-4a0a-ebf5c31682e5@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 02:40:09 PM Julian Elischer wrote: > On 21/12/2016 3:44 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > > Author: jhb > > Date: Tue Dec 20 19:44:44 2016 > > New Revision: 310336 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/310336 > > > > Log: > > Don't spin in pause() during early boot for kthreads other than thread0. > > > > pause() uses a spin loop to simulate a sleep during early boot. However, > > we only need this for thread0 to get far enough in the boot process to > > enable timers (at which point pause() can sleep). For other kthreads, > > sleeping in pause() is ok as the callout will be scheduled and will > > eventually fire once thread0 initializes timers. > > maybe we just need to depend on a variable "have_timers" > that is independent of the cold/hot/whatever settings. > first code to enable a timer sets it. Eventually I think some cold checks will devolve to that (and/or cold will just go away). We aren't quite at that point yet however (though we are getting closer). -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?148295416.6HGrYZ2Ojd>