Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:17:13 +0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
To:        Randall Stewart <rrs@netflix.com>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Randall Stewart <rrs@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r280785 - in head/sys: kern netgraph/atm/sscop netgraph/atm/uni sys
Message-ID:  <551AC889.2020708@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <26047F0C-A975-4DAC-9077-31B5EC4902DA@netflix.com>
References:  <201503281250.t2SCoOkt020297@svn.freebsd.org> <32487399.PTq7ESkWJT@ralph.baldwin.cx> <26047F0C-A975-4DAC-9077-31B5EC4902DA@netflix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/31/15 8:26 AM, Randall Stewart wrote:
>
> On Mar 30, 2015, at 9:16 AM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org 
> <mailto:jhb@freebsd.org>> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, March 28, 2015 12:50:24 PM Randall Stewart wrote:
>>> Author: rrs
>>> Date: Sat Mar 28 12:50:24 2015
>>> New Revision: 280785
>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280785
>>>
>>> Log:
>>>  Change the callout to supply -1 to indicate we are not changing
>>>  CPU, also add protection against invalid CPU's as well as
>>>  split c_flags and c_iflags so that if a user plays with the active
>>>  flag (the one expected to be played with by callers in MPSAFE) 
>>> without
>>>  a lock, it won't adversely affect the callout system by causing a 
>>> corrupt
>>>  list. This also means that all callers need to use the macros and 
>>> *not*
>>>  play with the falgs directly (like netgraph used to).
>>>
>>>  Differential Revision: htts://reviews.freebsd.org/D1894
>>>  Reviewed by: .. timed out but looked at by jhb, imp, adrian hselasky
>>>               tested by hiren and netflix.
>>>  Sponsored by:Netflix Inc.
>>
>> Please use NOCPU rather than -1 directly for the CPU field when not
>> moving a callout.
>>
>
> John:
>
> I have made *all* of your suggested changes, adopting the comments and
> moving migration to kern_timeout.c.. thanks..
>
> Now as to the
>
> -1 -> NOCPU
>
> This is like pulling on a string on your sweater.. the only sensible 
> solution that
> I could come up with after chatting with Lawrence is to add
> #include <sys/proc.h>
> to everyone that uses the callout.h and does not have it already… 
> (putting it into callout.h does not work) .. sigh..
>
> Now for this cosmetic change I end up with the following changes 
> (and as yet I have
> not built LINT or universe so there may be more).. I have spent 
> about 2 hours on this
> so far and I can at least build a kernel with the change for amd64 :-0
>
> Here is what has to change, do you really think that this is worth it?
>
> Note I did not look into moving NOCPU in proc.h it says it means no 
> CPU is present
> which is sort of the meaning we want.. I am not sure if the define 
> could be moved .. but
> that too may be yet another string...

sounds like NOCPU should be defined somewhere else.
>
> Is this worth it, or do you have another idea on how best to do this???
>
> R
>
> ------




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?551AC889.2020708>