Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:33:07 +0530 From: "Joseph Koshy" <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> To: "Robert Watson" <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwpmc(4) changes to use 'mp_maxid' instead of 'mp_ncpus'. Message-ID: <84dead720803141003p386f10e3y9f0a8aeceada53c4@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20080314112104.I60466@fledge.watson.org> References: <200803131516.12284.jhb@freebsd.org> <84dead720803132232k15c3aad7pe59875f0c84e0c27@mail.gmail.com> <20080313200839.S1091@desktop> <20080314.003749.-432746071.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080314112104.I60466@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
rw> Koshy has pointed out that changing just the kernel parts is *insufficient* to rw> remove the assumption of non-sparse CPU identifiers, because the kernel parts rw> are not all there is to hwpmc. The KASSERT()s document not just the rw> assumptions of the kernel code, which are updated by the proposed patch, but rw> also relate to the guarantees made by the user APIs for hwpmc libraries, rw> tools, and documentation. They are directly affected by the proposed change rw> because they both expose and rely on the non-sparse CPU identifier assumption, rw> and also need to be updated to reflect the changed assumption. Thank you Robert, for keeping the focus on the technical issues. Regards, Koshy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?84dead720803141003p386f10e3y9f0a8aeceada53c4>