From owner-freebsd-current Sun Apr 23 13:29:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from implode.root.com (root.com [209.102.106.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FFD37BA4B; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:29:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dg@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06779; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:25:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200004232025.NAA06779@implode.root.com> To: Matthew Dillon Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" , phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP changes and breaking kld object module compatibility In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:14:21 PDT." <200004232014.NAA64138@apollo.backplane.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:25:43 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >:> There's another good reason to MFC the linux patch on wednesday... >:> that is, to do it at the same time the SMP cleanup is MFC'd, and that >:> is because both patch sets require the linux kernel module to be >:> recompiled and I'd rather not force people to do that twice. >:> >:> The SMP patchset, in fact, requires that all kernel modules be >:> recompiled due to the locks that were removed from the spl*() macros. I wonder if they really must be recompiled. It sounds like that would improve performance, but is seems like gratuitous locking in this area wouldn't necessarily cause things to break. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Creator of high-performance Internet servers - http://www.terasolutions.com Pave the road of life with opportunities. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message