Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:07:47 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: smp@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: system initialization order. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009130205390.1110-100000@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <78946.968769061@critter>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > With SMPng I think we need to take a good hard stare at the > order in which we initialize the system, a lot of the reasons > behind the current order are invalid, and some new reasons for > a new order are not honoured. > > Roughly speaking, I think we need something like this order: > > init console > print copyright > initialize VM/malloc(9) > init other stuff needed for: > setup proc0 > setup proc1 (park it on a semaphore for now) > setup idle procs > enable scheduler > init hardclock > enable hardclock interrupt Should be softclock (scheduler doesn't use hardclock). > initialize timecounters > > This should now represent a sufficiently "normal" environment that > the order of the rest doesn't really matter very much: I think this mainly moves clock initialization earlier. OK with me. Bruce 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009130205390.1110-100000>