Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 17:37:17 +0200 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Cc: Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@freebsd.org>, Peter Wemm <peter@freebsd.org> Subject: [PATCH] Add MAXCPU as a kernel config option and quality discussion on this Message-ID: <CAJ-FndDZu0cBrVbH3W%2B8Tj86T5h%2BwwWqUVnjJO1rtXopKodNOA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've made this patch for making MAXCPU a kernel config option: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/maxcpu_kernel_opt.diff Besides if this is a good idea or not (which I think it is) I want to discuss this implementation and similar related problems. In this case I've been forced to include opt_maxcpu.h in all the MD param.h implementations. A similar case, KSTACK_PAGES, includes the opt_kstack_pages.h only in the consumers. While this is possible for KSTACK_PAGES, because there are very little consumers, it would be impratical for MAXCPU. Besides, this is a very dangerous practice IMHO: if a consumer fails to add opt_kstack_pages it may end up with a faulty value, introducing a breakage that would go unnoticed. In my case, I think that including opt_maxcpu is a viable panacea, but in general, after discussing with peter@, probabilly the better idea would be having a centralized script that does pre-processing before to start compiling and set with the right values all those constants (something like genassym.c, but of course with a different purpose). What are your ideas on that? Do you think that including opt_maxcpu.h would be acceptable for the time being? Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-FndDZu0cBrVbH3W%2B8Tj86T5h%2BwwWqUVnjJO1rtXopKodNOA>