From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 20 17:02:14 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1F037B405 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 17:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from magic.adaptec.com (magic-mail.adaptec.com [208.236.45.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19F4C43FB1 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 17:02:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scott_long@btc.adaptec.com) Received: from redfish.adaptec.com (redfish.adaptec.com [162.62.50.11]) by magic.adaptec.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3KNxjZ13064; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:59:45 -0700 Received: from btc.btc.adaptec.com ([10.100.0.52]) by redfish.adaptec.com (8.8.8p2+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA25960; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 17:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from btc.adaptec.com (hollin [10.100.253.56]) by btc.btc.adaptec.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA08850; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:01:57 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <3EA334F2.60409@btc.adaptec.com> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:01:54 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030206 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wes Peters References: <200304182047.h3IKlhIZ000817@number6.magda.ca> <20030419165033.V15269@gamplex.bde.org> <3EA10351.3010001@btc.adaptec.com> <200304201652.37912.wes@softweyr.com> In-Reply-To: <200304201652.37912.wes@softweyr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: config(8) should check if a scheduler is selected X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 00:02:15 -0000 Wes Peters wrote: > On Saturday 19 April 2003 01:05, Scott Long wrote: > >>Bruce Evans wrote: >> >>>It is the only mandatory option (sic). Kernels with no options >>>(although they might not be useful) can be built except for this bug. >>> Example of a minimal config file (before misconfiguration of the >>>configuration of scheduling). >>> >>>%%% >>>machine i386 >>>cpu I686_CPU >>>ident MIN >>>%%% >> >>The scheduler is (one of) the first core subsystems to be made >>modular. If by chance the VM system became modular (VM_MACH, VM_UVM >>=-) you'd have a similar situation there also. > > > Doesn't this argue for a keyword rather than an option? If you have to > have one or the other for the kernel to function, wouldn't a 'scheduler' > keyword (and likewise a 'vm' or 'vm_model' keyword) save us from the > lunacy of non-optional options? > > >>I'm afraid that the lack of seatbelts in config(8) for SCHED_xxx will >>generate a lot of user complaints when 5.1 is released. Since code to >>implement it has not magically appeared yet, we might have to make due >>with adding extra eye-catching comments to things like NOTES and >>GENERIC. > > > Or maybe we could fix it? > I'll repeat again: >> Since code to implement it has not magically appeared yet... =-) I'd be happy if someone took this up. If Terry can do it with magical linker sets and virtual tables or whatever, that would be great too. Until patches appear, I'm not too concerned on how it's done. Scott