Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:48:52 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> To: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sparc64/include smp.h src/sys/sparc64/sparc64 genassym.c mp_machdep.c Message-ID: <89B9A8BE-05F2-4DB2-B7B2-AB240AA9F0DD@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20080918191947.GX94638@alchemy.franken.de> References: <200809181356.m8IDuaxT089888@repoman.freebsd.org> <200809181027.51997.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080918191947.GX94638@alchemy.franken.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 18, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:27:51AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Thursday 18 September 2008 09:56:30 am Marius Strobl wrote: >>> marius 2008-09-18 13:56:30 UTC >>> >>> FreeBSD src repository >>> >>> Modified files: >>> sys/sparc64/include smp.h >>> sys/sparc64/sparc64 genassym.c mp_machdep.c >>> Log: >>> SVN rev 183142 on 2008-09-18 13:56:30Z by marius >>> >>> - Newer firmware versions no longer provide SUNW,stop-self so just >>> disable interrupts and loop forever with these. >>> - Hide all MP-related bits in <machine/smp.h> underneath #ifdef >>> SMP. >>> - Inline ipi_all_but_self(9) and ipi_selected(9). We don't expose >>> any >>> additional bits but save a few cycles by doing so. >>> - Remove ipi_all(9), which actually only called panic(9). It >>> can't be >>> implemented natively anyway and having it removed at least causes >>> MI users to fail already fail when linking. >> >> Should we just remove ipi_all() completely? >> > > Well, grepping in the CVS repository shows that there never was > an actually consumer of ipi_all() (only #ifdef'ed out ones in > ironically the sparc64 code) so it seems to be a good candidate > for axing. Generally I can't think of a reason why MI code would > want a CPU to send an IPI to itself. Actually, ipi_self() also > isn't and never was used in MI code, only in ia64 and powerpc > code for testing purposes. That's DS (=developer-specific) code rather than MI or MD code :-) Sending a test IPI to 'self' helps with bring-up or porting, but serves no real purpose (other than maybe a POST-like purpose) once IPIs are known to work... -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?89B9A8BE-05F2-4DB2-B7B2-AB240AA9F0DD>