From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 6 22:41:32 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D32A16A4CE for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:41:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from intercom.intercom.pl (intercom.intercom.pl [195.205.36.110]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1639343D3F for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 22:41:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jurek@intercom.pl) Received: from jurek (ip-83-142-114-194.enterpol.pl [83.142.114.194]) (authenticated bits=0)j06MdoN2033232 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2005 23:39:51 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jurek@intercom.pl) From: "Jerzy Sulowski" To: Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 23:41:22 +0100 Message-ID: <023701c4f440$d92ebe20$0200a8c0@intercom.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <1105050997.27981.26.camel@palm.tree.com> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/645/Mon Dec 27 23:56:20 2004 clamav-milter version 0.80j on intercom.intercom.pl X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on intercom.intercom.pl Subject: unsubscribe X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:41:32 -0000 -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Stephan Uphoff Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 11:37 PM To: Julian Elischer Cc: David Schultz; freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Tony Arcieri; John = Baldwin Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c (fwd) On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 16:33, Julian Elischer wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: >=20 > >On Wednesday 15 December 2004 05:27 pm, Julian Elischer wrote: > > =20 > > > >>Tony Arcieri wrote: > >> =20 > >> > >>>On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 04:40:50PM -0500, David Schultz wrote: > >>> =20 > >>> > >>>>On Wed, Dec 15, 2004, Tony Arcieri wrote: > >>>> =20 > >>>> > >>>>>And am I correct that the UMA implementation in RELENG_5 has = rendered > >>>>>proc_fini() obsolete and thus it won't ever be called? > >>>>> =20 > >>>>> > >>>>This has very little to do with either UMA or ULE. Yes, it's > >>>>unused, but it's still there as a reminder that it *ought* to be > >>>>used. Unless there are still races I don't know about, it's > >>>>probably safe to start using it again. > >>>> =20 > >>>> > >>>Well, I'm going by the comments and implementation from kern_proc.c = in > >>>HEAD: > >>> > >>>/* > >>>* UMA should ensure that this function is never called. > >>>* Freeing a proc structure would violate type stability. > >>>*/ > >>>static void > >>>proc_fini(void *mem, int size) > >>>{ > >>> > >>> panic("proc reclaimed"); > >>>} > >>> > >>>The implementation in RELENG_5 invokes a scheduler function which = is no > >>>longer present in HEAD. > >>> =20 > >>> > >>when we declare teh zone for processes we tell UMA that it must = never free > >>a proc back to system memory. thus the 'fini' routine, that would be called > >>is a page of that zone were to be returned to the system, should = never > >>be called. > >> =20 > >> > > > >Why are struct procs forced to be type-stable? > > >=20 > I have forgotten.. but they did.. > Peter also knew at one stage and he too has forgotten :-) kern/62890 ? Guess this one is mine now :-( Stephan _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"