Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 20:38:21 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Short summary Message-ID: <75460.959225901@localhost> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 24 May 2000 19:03:55 PDT." <200005250203.TAA78162@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The one problem with this concept is that there is no easy migration > path getting from SPL ops to Mutex ops, because an SPL op currently > involves a bitmask of several interrupts rather then a single interrupt. > Thus the SPL ops would translate into several mutexes rather then a > single mutex and wind up being *very* expensive for the period of time > it takes us to then move onto the next step (collapsing them into single > mutexes again). We were looking for an easier migration path in > order to try to keep the kernel runnable for the month or two (or > longer) it would require to get everything straightened out. I think it's also fair to say that we'd be willing to accept a certain period of outright breakage in FreeBSD-current if it gets us to the right place, e.g. a painless transition is not necessarily the goal so much as getting things done right. We've gone through similar periods with -current in the past and nobody had too much difficultly with the concept provided that we ANNOUNCED it well in advance and told the cvsuppers to basically turn their cron jobs off or elect not to try and build the world until the tree was declared safe again. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?75460.959225901>