Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:49:10 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: "Alan L. Cox" <alc@imimic.com> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf files.ia64 src/sys/ia64/ia64 pmap.cuma_machdep.c Message-ID: <20030920204910.GA1382@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <3F6CAFAA.F48E2A12@imimic.com> References: <200309201927.h8KJRm9e006832@repoman.freebsd.org> <3F6CAFAA.F48E2A12@imimic.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 02:51:06PM -0500, Alan L. Cox wrote: > > Added files: > > sys/ia64/ia64 uma_machdep.c > > Log: > > Move uma_small_alloc() and uma_small_free() to uma_machdep.c. These > > functions reference UMA internals from <vm/uma_int.h>, which makes > > them highly unwanted in non-UMA specific files. *snip* > An observation ... we now have three different locations, on four > different architectures, for these functions. I definitely agree that > pmap.c is the wrong place because these functions have nothing to do > with page table and/or TLB management. Long ago, I encouraged Jake to > start a trend for the better by placing the sparc64 implementations in > vm_machdep.c. Whether it's uma_machdep.c or vm_machdep.c doesn't matter > much to me, only that we arrive at a consensus on which it is. I would > observe the similarities to the new, optimized amd64 and ia64 > sf_buf_alloc() implementations as an argument for vm_machdep.c. I originally placed them in vm_machdep.c, but noticed I had to pull in more headers, including <vm/uma_int.h>. At that time I opted for uma_machdep.c. If you think vm_machdep.c is good enough then let's move them there. Make the call. I'll follow suit. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030920204910.GA1382>