From owner-freebsd-current Thu Mar 7 19:28:22 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE40637B404; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:28:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g283S3KD071536; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 22:28:03 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200203080304.g2834n571759@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200203072143.g27LhaL97112@harmony.village.org> <20020307205844.C12044@locore.ca> <200203080304.g2834n571759@apollo.backplane.com> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 22:28:02 -0500 To: Matthew Dillon , Jake Burkholder From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: Patch for critical_enter()/critical_exit() & interrupt assem Cc: Robert Watson , FreeBSD current users Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.3 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 7:04 PM -0800 3/7/02, Matthew Dillon wrote: >:Bruce also had some comments which were shrugged off, I thought they >:were important. Specifically, please do not make unnecessary changes >:to the assembler code. Macros do not need to be defined before they >:are used, I believe this was the justification for some of the >:reordering in apic_vector.s which makes the patch confusing. Please >:do not tab out the "; \" at the end of the lines in the INTR and >:FAST_INTR macros in icu_vector.s. This just makes unnecessary diffs. >: >:Jake > > Actually all I did there was square up icu_vector.s so it looked > almost the same as apic_vector.s. I would consider that an > improvement. Perhaps that part of the update could be considered "cosmetic", and thus be done as a separate update -- just so people can tell which lines are cosmetic changes and which ones are substantive. That is more work for you, but it makes it easier on reviewers, and it is certainly consistent with what developers are asked to do on other updates they make. You'll still probably have a debate on the "wonderfulness" of that cosmetic change, but at least it makes it easier for the major changes to looked at and commented on separately. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message