Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 01:16:59 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Andrew R. Reiter" <arr@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Where to initialize certain locks... Message-ID: <3CA9770B.342AEFFA@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020402040809.18134L-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Andrew R. Reiter" wrote: > On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > :If you are going to complain about SYSINIT(), at least complain > :about something like the bubble sort in init_main.c (so I can > :dismiss it as a one-time operation that didn't need to be that > :fast, compared to, say, not doing concurrent hardware probes > :simultaneously for lack of a one-shot timer outcall mechanism). > > Dood, you're going way off track here. I was soley disliking the fact > that I had my MTX_SYSINIT() macro have the sub and order arguments. I am > not and was not complaining about SYSINIT(). Oh. That's very different, then. Never mind. 8-) 8-). For that, you can just make your MTX_SYSINIT() not take args, and pass in SI_SUB_LOCK and SI_ORDER_MIDDLE. You probably don't want to do it at SI_SUB_MTX_POOL, unless you can guarantee there will be no allocations (someone else should be able to tell you if this is a valid assumption for a mutex, and whether it's likely to remain so for all time). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CA9770B.342AEFFA>