Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:53:52 +0000 From: Paul Richards <paul@freebsd-services.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c initcpu.c locore.s machdep.c mp_machdep.c src/sys/i386/include asnames.h md_var.h Message-ID: <20030123085352.GS18342@survey.codeburst.net> In-Reply-To: <200301222014.h0MKEr8k018331@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200301222014.h0MKEr8k018331@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:14:53PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: > jhb 2003/01/22 12:14:53 PST > > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_4) > sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c initcpu.c locore.s machdep.c > mp_machdep.c > sys/i386/include asnames.h md_var.h > Log: > MFC: Precursors to simple hyperthreading support and sync with current: Is it a good idea to do this in 4? We should stop moving new features into 4 for 2 reasons, a) I've always been against feature development of -stable, but b) we need to encourage take-up of our latest branch and the less "modern" 4 is the more likely people will be to migrate around 5.2. The SMP work won't be such a huge draw since so few people have SMP machines. Paul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030123085352.GS18342>