Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 01:53:50 +0100 From: Olivier Houchard <cognet@ci0.org> To: David Xu <davidxu@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/arm/include machdep.h pmap.h sysarch.h src/sys/arm/arm cpufunc_asm.S genassym.c machdep.c pmap.c swtch.S src/sys/arm/xscale std.xscale src/sys/arm/xscale/i80321 std.i80321 Message-ID: <20050227005350.GA33699@ci0.org> In-Reply-To: <422116F0.7030604@freebsd.org> References: <200502261859.j1QIx1fL008419@repoman.freebsd.org> <422116F0.7030604@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 08:40:16AM +0800, David Xu wrote: > I am thinking why you can finish the task in such short time. :=) > > Should sysarch(ARM_SET_TP,...) write the thread pointer to > ARM_TP_ADDRESS now not just remembers it or did I miss > something ? > > David Xu > Well I didn't really thought about it yet, but the sysarch() mechanism lost its interest now, I was just pondering keeping it to provide a costly but working way to handle the tp in the unlikely situation where someone would want to do that on a SMP system with CPUs that can't lock cache line. I have nothing aginst ARM_SET_TP changing ARM_TP_ADDRESS, but it doesn't matter much since userland tools can mess with ARM_TP_ADDRESS directly. Cheers, Olivier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050227005350.GA33699>