From owner-cvs-all Sat Sep 1 15:43:28 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from earth.backplane.com (earth-nat-cw.backplane.com [208.161.114.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE97C37B403; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:43:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by earth.backplane.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) id f81MhJ976806; Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:43:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:43:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Matt Dillon Message-Id: <200109012243.f81MhJ976806@earth.backplane.com> To: Peter Wemm Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_prof.c kern_ntptime.c kern_xxx.c References: <20010901221226.48CC33807@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :Yes, John's stuff could be done in the main tree. But he's using p4 as a :tool where he commits frequent tweaks to the tree, and uses that for :syncing his test boxes for testing after commits. As soon as there's :enough to commit that has been tested properly he commits it to cvs. If :you'd prefer that he commit untested stuff to cvs and then test after the :fact, then please say the word. : :Cheers, :-Peter :-- :Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au It depends what you define as testing. 95% of the code modifications related to the proc lock and the struct file and struct filedesc locking do not require a great deal of testing because they don't actually do anything. These all devolve into defining a few procedures (guys, please stop using macros!) which can initially be left empty or do nothing more then minimal ref counting to make sure things match up. 95% of the work is inserting the locking and unlocking procedure calls wherever they are needed throughout the codebase - but since the procs don't really do anything, this can all be done in the main tree and all be done with only minimal testing. It's the last 5% that requires the serious testing -- making the locking and unlocking procedures actually do something real. After that it simply becomes a matter of removing or pushing-down the Giant wrapper in the now-protected routines, one syscall at a time or one file at a time, with moderate testing. It's that simple. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message