Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:13:58 -0700
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Nate Lawson <njl@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys ktr.h src/sys/kern kern_clock.c kern_switch.c
Message-ID:  <43A47F96.5040304@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <200512171445.04475.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <200512170357.jBH3vAhh030893@repoman.freebsd.org> <200512171445.04475.jhb@freebsd.org>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

John Baldwin wrote:

> On Friday 16 December 2005 10:57 pm, Nate Lawson wrote:
> 
>>njl         2005-12-17 03:57:10 UTC
>>
>>  FreeBSD src repository
>>
>>  Modified files:
>>    sys/sys              ktr.h
>>    sys/kern             kern_clock.c kern_switch.c
>>  Log:
>>  Clean up unused or poorly utilized KTR values.  Remove KTR_FS, KTR_KGDB,
>>  and KTR_IO as they were never used.  Remove KTR_CLK since it was only
>>  used for hardclock firing and use KTR_INTR there instead.  Remove
>>  KTR_CRITICAL since it was only used for crit enter/exit and use
>>  KTR_CONTENTION instead.
> 
> 
> Actually, I thought I had mentioned that KTR_CRITICAL should stay as it is 
> (well, and the larger thought about doing away with the entire bitmask 
> concept which no one responded to).  critical_enter/exit are not related in 
> the least to KTR_CONTENTION which is used for MUTEX_PROFILING, nor do they 
> have anything at all to do with contention of any sort.  If you must stick 
> them somewhere, put them in KTR_SCHED instead.  I think scottl@ recently 
> added support to schedgraph for those traces anyway (though I'm not sure if 
> they are in his local tree or CVS).
> 

Yes, it's in CVS.  In the big scheme of things, it's probably a good
idea to put KTR_CRITICAL in the same domain as KTR_SCHED.  And yeah, it
has nothing to do with KTR_CONTENTION.  It was this part of the drive-by
commit that irritated me most.  A simple email saying, "I'm about to do
this, please review," would have have been welcomed and likely not even
ignored.

Scott



help

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43A47F96.5040304>