From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 19 00:45:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656C116A4CE; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:45:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A06C43FE5; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:45:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1]) hAJ8j6g7015269; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:45:06 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)hAJ8j6us015253; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:45:06 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to mark@grondar.org using -f Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])hAJ8fVDw043136; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:41:31 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) From: Mark Murray Message-Id: <200311190841.hAJ8fVDw043136@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Nate Lawson In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:46:24 PST." <20031118163849.S65744@root.org> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:41:31 +0000 Sender: mark@grondar.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_NO_LOWER,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_intr.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:45:09 -0000 Nate Lawson writes: > > > Hackfix to patch around a kernel panic I introduced. Real fix to > > > follow. In the meanwhile, we are not harvesting interrupt entropy. > > > > > > Approved by: re (jhb) > > > > The correct fix is approximately to back out the changes to the > > harvester. It needs to use preallocated storage like it used to since > > it is called from nearly the lowest level of interrupt handling when > > neither malloc() nor sleep locks may be used. Using preallocated storage > > also simplifies the locking. > > I agree. Separating the buffer into per-source buffers does not require > changing from a ring buffer to a malloc/FIFO model. Its not quite as simple as that. :-) A single ring-buffer is badly suboptimal, as it doesn't handle changes in the order of the buffer elements well. I am stress-testing a new malloc-free (well, it mallocs at init time) version version. This uses preallocated buffer elements, and cycles them through a fifo (in this case, very nearly a ring buffer, but allowing the contents to become disordered). M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH