From owner-freebsd-arch  Sat Nov 18 14:30:42 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58B8237B479
	for <arch@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 14:30:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA26545;
	Sun, 19 Nov 2000 09:30:14 +1100
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 09:30:12 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org
To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: new monotime() call for all architectures. 
In-Reply-To: <200011181652.eAIGqgJ12738@gratis.grondar.za>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0011190925260.767-100000@besplex.bde.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, Mark Murray wrote:

> > No!  machine/cpufunc.h is for "Functions to provide access to special cpu
> > instructions", not for functions that happen to call a (primitive) function
> > in cpufunc.h.
> 
> Then where? clock.h has already been thoroughly objected to.

clock.c is a reasonable place for it.  On i386's, it needs to access
`tsc_present' which is currently only in clock.c.  How much more
(or less) efficient is the inline version?

<machine/random.h> is another reasonable place for it.

Bruce



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message