Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 02:29:49 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 226974] kernel DSI read trap at boot Message-ID: <bug-226974-21-szjhXJaQ46@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-226974-21@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-226974-21@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D226974 Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com --- Comment #4 from Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> --- What is the relationship of mp_ncpus vs. mp_maxid as used in the code from vfs_bio.c : static void bd_init(struct bufdomain *bd) { . . . bd->bd_cleanq =3D &bd->bd_subq[mp_ncpus]; bq_init(bd->bd_cleanq, QUEUE_CLEAN, -1, "bufq clean lock"); for (i =3D 0; i <=3D mp_maxid; i++) bq_init(&bd->bd_subq[i], QUEUE_CLEAN, i, "bufq clean subqueue lock"); . . . Is mp_maxid<mp_ncpus always so that the loop never replaces bd->bd_subq[mp_ncpus]? Note that the loop goes over 0..mp_maxid (inclusive of both ends), which has mp_maxid+1 values in the range. If the numbering can be sparse, might mp_maxid+1 be a better pick than mp_ncpus (assuming mp_ncpus does not count/include "missing" id's)? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-226974-21-szjhXJaQ46>