From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May 31 14:48:35 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5A0E016A4CE; Mon, 31 May 2004 14:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.198.39])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4285843D1F; Mon, 31 May 2004 14:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from interjet.elischer.org ([24.7.73.28])
          by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP
          id <20040531214833015006o8jne>; Mon, 31 May 2004 21:48:33 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA23089;
	Mon, 31 May 2004 14:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 14:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Thomas Moestl <t.moestl@tu-bs.de>
In-Reply-To: <20040520122411.GA795@timesink.dyndns.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0405311447240.22996-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org>
cc: sparc64@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: sparc64 kernel code question..
X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc <freebsd-sparc64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-sparc64>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64>,
	<mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 21:48:35 -0000



On Thu, 20 May 2004, Thomas Moestl wrote:

Thomas, was it you who suggested making a patch to move the
cpu_sched_exit() code to cpu_throw()?

julian