Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 22:18:43 +0300 From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r210054 - in head/sys: conf kern x86/x86 Message-ID: <4C3E0D93.1000009@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201007141451.07452.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201007141331.o6EDVRp2078644@svn.freebsd.org> <201007141420.05688.jhb@freebsd.org> <4C3E0384.9090903@FreeBSD.org> <201007141451.07452.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:35:48 pm Alexander Motin wrote: >> John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 1:01:14 pm Alexander Motin wrote: >>>> John Baldwin wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 11:59:46 am Alexander Motin wrote: >>>>>> John Baldwin wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:31:27 am Alexander Motin wrote: >>>>>>>> Author: mav >>>>>>>> Date: Wed Jul 14 13:31:27 2010 >>>>>>>> New Revision: 210054 >>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/210054 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>> Move timeevents.c to MI code, as it is not x86-specific. I already have >>>>>>>> it working on Marvell ARM SoCs, and it would be nice to unify timer >>>>> code >>>>>>>> between more platforms. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Added: >>>>>>>> head/sys/kern/timeevents.c >>>>>>>> - copied unchanged from r210053, head/sys/x86/x86/timeevents.c >>>>>>>> Deleted: >>>>>>>> head/sys/x86/x86/timeevents.c >>>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>>> head/sys/conf/files.amd64 >>>>>>>> head/sys/conf/files.i386 >>>>>>>> head/sys/conf/files.pc98 >>>>>>> Can this be merged with kern_et.c, >>>>>> They are different. kern_et.c provides event timer drivers API, >>>>>> timeevents.c consumes it to manage kernel clocks. kern_et.c >>>>>> theoretically can be used without timeevents.c if some other code >>>>>> consume timers, for example, exposing them to user-level. >>>>>> >>>>>> May be names indeed cryptic a bit, but I had no better ideas. >>>>>> >>>>>>> or perhaps called subr_eventtimers.c instead? >>>>>> Whatever you like, but why exactly so and why "subr_" important? >>>>> The vast majority of files in sys/kern use some sort of prefix, either sys_*, >>>>> kern_*, subr_*, etc. subr_ was just a suggestion to avoid clashing with >>>>> kern_et.c. If timeevents.c is specific to clocks then maybe it should have >>>>> 'clock' in its name somehow? Right now having kern_et == kern_eventtimer.c >>>>> and timeevents.c is a bit ambiguous. Somehow making it clear that >>>>> timeevents.c is for clocks might help. >>>> We already have kern_clock.c and subr_clock.c. kern_clock.c is quite >>>> close by meaning. What's about kern_clocksource.c? >>> Ok. I assume it would not be easy to just merge this file into kern_clock.c >>> itself? >> At least not until all architectures will adapt to it. > > Do you think that is the long term goal? I think not, but timer code for the many arches need to be refactored, all of them are different and some I've never seen. > If so, you could put this code into > kern_clock.c and selectively enable it with a macro defined in > <machine/param.h> as a temporary measure until all platforms have adopted it. That's possible, but I am not sure it is reasonable. -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C3E0D93.1000009>