From owner-freebsd-alpha Tue Nov 10 14:25:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26328 for freebsd-alpha-outgoing; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:25:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA26320 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:25:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA00993; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:23:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199811102223.OAA00993@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Andrew Gallatin cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: another small observation In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Nov 1998 17:18:14 EST." <13896.47289.309597.453451@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:23:33 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Mike Smith writes: > > > On x86's this concept of "halt" makes sense, since PC BIOSes > > > typically do not have a halted state. But on Alphas it's a > > > real misfeature. The SRM console is a lot more useful than > > > a PC BIOS, in fact it's the nicest console I've seen, and it > > > would be good to be able to get back to it. > > > > This is a consequence of my unifying the "halt" and "reboot" behaviour - > > the Alpha was doing it's own thing rather than the standard MI > > behaviour. > > > > It would be relatively trivial to move the "what to do when halting" > > behaviour into the MD code; you're welcome to submit diffs, and I'd be > > happy to talk you through what would need to be done. > > I'm bothered by this behaviour as well. > > All you need to do to get the old behaviour back is to call > cpu_halt(). Is the following patch acceptable? I realize there are a > lot of #ifdefs.. No. The Alpha should register an at_shutdown hook which checks for RB_HALT and calls the appropriate halt routine. cpu_halt() should also die. The goal is to move as much shutdown behaviour as possible onto the callout lists. This keeps all the MD code in the MD modules, and means there's less of a rigid interface to have to conform to. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message