Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:47:51 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: proposed changes to kern_switch.c and kern_synch.c Message-ID: <20020717004750.A7375@iguana.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <20020717074335.1DA923926@overcee.wemm.org>; from peter@wemm.org on Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:43:35AM -0700 References: <20020716235216.B6785@iguana.icir.org> <20020717074335.1DA923926@overcee.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:43:35AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote: > Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > > In order to make this work, it is convenient to have all > > scheduler-specific functions and data structures in a > > single file (kern_switch*.c), and generic support in > > another one (kern_synch.c). I believe this was also the original > > BSD design in partitioning the code between the two files. > > You would be mistaken there. kern_switch.c is new and has only existed > very recently. kern_switch.c came about as a C implementation of code that > used to be embedded inside i386/swtch.s. It has taken on a life of its own > now though. :-/ good to know! Anyways, does the partitioning of functionalities sound reasonable ? cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020717004750.A7375>