From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 24 17:47:09 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B9F16A476; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:47:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from vms042pub.verizon.net (vms042pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D148C13C48A; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:47:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from mx.menantico.com ([71.188.11.206]) by vms042.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JQF00IKUFWKBMZ2@vms042.mailsrvcs.net>; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:43:33 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:45:31 -0400 From: Skip Ford In-reply-to: <20071021124157.K70919@fledge.watson.org> To: Robert Watson Message-id: <20071024174531.GJ51310@menantico.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline References: <20071019232846.GQ31826@elvis.mu.org> <4719B06F.3000103@FreeBSD.org> <20071020181811.W70919@fledge.watson.org> <20071020192717.GX31826@elvis.mu.org> <20071021124157.K70919@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Kris Kennaway , Alfred Perlstein , stable@freebsd.org, jhb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LOCK_PROFILING in -stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:47:10 -0000 Robert Watson wrote: > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > >>This is my feeling also -- I would consider ABI breakage a show stopper > >>for 6.x, but feel otherwise that the new code is much more mature and > >>capable and would be quite beneficial to people building appliances and > >>related products on 6.x. You might check with Attilio about whether there > >>are any remaining outstanding issues that need to be resolved first, and > >>make sure to send a heads up out on stable@ and put a note in UPDATING > >>that the option and details have changed. > > > >I still get confused as to the meaning of this... > > > >It only breaks ABI when it's enabled. > > > >I think that is OK, right? > > As we're eliminating MUTEX_PROFILING and replacing it with LOCK_PROFILING, > I think it is OK that the ABI for one differs from the other as long as the > base kernel ABI remains static. I.e., this seems OK to me also. If -stable will have LOCK_PROFILING, it'd be really nice to have it compatible with a standard world in some way, even if just with a makefile hack that builds netstat_lp(1) in addition to netstat(1) (and other utilities.) One can easily boot a diskless email, web, or name server into kernels with other debug-type options without maintaining multiple worlds. One might want to run a LOCK_PROFILING stable kernel on a diskless email server for a period of time, but that will require either a matching world, or putting up with breakage for that period of time, neither of which is a fair expectation in a stable environment, IMO. I can maintain local makefile hacks for production if somebody with some makefile foo gets me started. -- Skip