From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Oct 10 10:34:34 2002 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 2211B37B401 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 92DB443E9C for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:34:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com) Received: (qmail 18175 invoked by uid 1000); 10 Oct 2002 17:34:29 -0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:34:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson To: Jeff Roberson Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Scheduler patch, ready for commit. In-Reply-To: <20021010022058.A23516-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Jeff Roberson wrote: > Yes, I agree, this is an important next step. I'm thinking that the > scheduler should indicate how much space is needed to the proc allocation > code. This much extra space could be allocated, and a pointer to > scheduler specific data could really be a pointer within that allocated > structure. This way it might be near enough for processor caches to be > effective. Clearly this needs more work. That is outside of the scope of > the current patch though. > > Thanks, > Jeff Just a minor point: if it's allocated as one chunk, the offset will need to be word-aligned. -Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message