Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 15:13:22 -0700 From: Sean Bruno <seanbru@yahoo-inc.com> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: "sbruno@freebsd.org" <sbruno@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [patch and review please] 64 CPU Support Message-ID: <1280096002.14823.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20100725205730.GG22295@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20100722213836.GH15227@martini.nu> <1279836216.2456.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20100723003611.GA66678@martini.nu> <7573B69C-3C37-449A-A27F-5B0B2ED84757@mac.com> <1280090933.14823.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20100725205730.GG22295@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 13:57 -0700, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:48:53PM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > Reposting from -stable. > > > > Kind of a large patch, but in order to make an omlette, you need to > > break a few servers. > > > > This is a diff against -CURRENT, not stable-8 as I didn't get a chance > > to test it. It is directly based off of changes that peter@ made to the > > Yahoo FreeBSD 7 tree. > > > > I have compile and boot tested this on my local machines, but I don't > > have 64 CPU machines to test upon. > > > > Sean > > > > Very low-priority comment (I looked at the patch at the time it was > posted to stable@). Nice thing about the patch is that it presumably > identifies all the places that depend on the wideness of the cpu > mask. Would it make sense to abstract the cpumask operations with > some macros to not repeat the search for the places when 64 will > be too narrow again ? What do you mean? Can you give me a quick example? Sean
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1280096002.14823.24.camel>