From owner-freebsd-current Mon Aug 27 14: 0:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from smtp016.mail.yahoo.com (smtp016.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.113]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4F3DB37B409 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 14:00:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kc5vdj@yahoo.com) Received: from mkc-65-28-47-209.kc.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.28.47.209) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Aug 2001 21:00:38 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3B8AB4F3.1000208@yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:00:35 -0500 From: Jim Bryant Reply-To: kc5vdj@yahoo.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i386; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010726 Netscape6/6.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Dillon Cc: Garance A Drosihn , John Baldwin , Daniel Eischen , current@FreeBSD.ORG, Julian Elischer Subject: Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up! References: <3B8AAEC6.7050302@yahoo.com> <200108272042.f7RKgnT24926@earth.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matt Dillon wrote: > :> and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to > :> be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have > :> to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this > :> come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in > :> the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until > :> after "5.0". > : > : > :I believe that I read in an earlier thread that the archetecture-specific changes are minimal, and that majority of the changes are > :in high-level constructs in the kernel. Of course, I could be recalling this incorrectly, but I don't think I am... > : > :jim > > Yes, this is correct. The assembly changes are just structural > indirections for things that were broken off from the proc structure. > The scheduler now messes with 'threads' rather then 'processes' for > the most part. That part of the diff set is involved but straight > forward. Julian also add KSTACK_PAGES to allow the kernel stack to > be specified in a more controlled manner. > > Here is an excerpt so you can see what I mean: > > ... > - > - movl P_VMSPACE(%ecx), %edx > + movl TD_PROC(%ecx), %eax > + movl P_VMSPACE(%eax), %edx > movl PCPU(CPUID), %eax > btrl %eax, VM_PMAP+PM_ACTIVE(%edx) > > - movl P_ADDR(%ecx),%edx > + movl TD_PCB(%ecx),%edx > ... > > See? not much too it. > > -Matt That's about what I thought it would be... If the other archetectures are so flaky right now under FreeBSD, then maybe some people are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to opposing KSE integration using the other archetectures as the crux of their argument. Sounds like they need to be kicking some butts to catch up with the pack! Testing should be across the board, but I don't see any reason why, if the maintainers of the other archetectures are so behind on other tasks that they can't have a seperate, later, 5.0-RELEASE for them. We shouldn't sacrifice intel functionality for timetable slippage on the other archetectures, and honestly, that's how I'm reading the arguments against... Again, I could be wrong, but... Of course, we could always end up like NetBSD, with a development cycle that makes FreeBSD's current cycle look fast, only because of support for all of the different archetectures. No offense to the NetBSD'ers out there, NetBSD is a fine OS, but my point is that FreeBSD is [or was] a different paradigm, primarily [but not exclusively] intel. jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message