Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:53:37 +0200 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: attilio@freebsd.org, smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: request for review: backport of sx and rwlocks from 7.0 to 6-stable Message-ID: <46D7D711.80406@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20070831071048.GF87451@elvis.mu.org> References: <20070831071048.GF87451@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Hi guys, > > Some work here at work was approved for sharing with community so > I'm posting it here in hope of a review. > > We run some pretty good stress testing on our code, so I think it's > pretty solid. > > My only concern is that I've tried my best to preserve kernel source > API, but not binary compat though a few simple #defines. > > I can make binary compat, in albeit a somewhat confusing manner, but > that will require some rototilling and weird renaming of calls to > the sleepq and turnstile code. In short, I'd rather not, but I will > if you think it's something that should be done. > > There's also a few placeholders for lock profiling which I will > very likely be backporting shortly as well. > > Patch is attached. > > Comments/questions? Hmm, I would be happy to see this but I think binary compatibility is actually important here since this is -stable and low-level primitives like sx are probably used all over the place in existing third party modules. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46D7D711.80406>