From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  7 18:04:38 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 16BC516A4CE; Fri,  7 May 2004 18:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carver.gumbysoft.com (carver.gumbysoft.com [66.220.23.50])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CFFB843D39; Fri,  7 May 2004 18:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dwhite@gumbysoft.com)
Received: by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id BE5AF72DCB; Fri,  7 May 2004 18:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BC16872DBF; Fri,  7 May 2004 18:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 18:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com>
To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <409BF210.8030307@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040507175115.U45649@carver.gumbysoft.com>
References: <20040430135155.C67990@carver.gumbysoft.com>
	<20040507130607.Q42861@carver.gumbysoft.com>
	<409BF210.8030307@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: src/sys/vm/vm_init.c v1.43 hangs amd64
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 May 2004 01:04:38 -0000

On Fri, 7 May 2004, Scott Long wrote:

> Doug White wrote:
> > Also if we get into the 5.3 release timeframe we'll have to make a call to
> > ship with a -O2 compiled kernel or not.
> >
>
> Are you proposing dropping -O2 for 5.3 because you are afraid that there
> are other, not-yet-detected broken cases?  I thought that we found a
> source code work-around that forced gcc to generate the correct assembly
> with -O2.  Maybe that should be committed for the time being?

Dropping back to -O is the safer route of the two for sure ... who knows
how many other similar constructions are out there and just happen to not
cause hangs.

I'd just like us to do *something* before 5.3 gets out the door and we
have random amd64 boxes falling over in potentially unrecoverable
scenarios. :)

-- 
Doug White                    |  FreeBSD: The Power to Serve
dwhite@gumbysoft.com          |  www.FreeBSD.org