Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 15:43:32 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: "Attilio Rao" <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 119371 for review Message-ID: <200705091543.33002.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10705091233t405121d2qda9a058ecf4124bc@mail.gmail.com> References: <200705062110.l46LAZqE011583@repoman.freebsd.org> <200705091457.39167.jhb@freebsd.org> <3bbf2fe10705091233t405121d2qda9a058ecf4124bc@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 03:33:11 pm Attilio Rao wrote: > 2007/5/9, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>: > > On Sunday 06 May 2007 05:10:35 pm Rui Paulo wrote: > > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=119371 > > > > > > Change 119371 by rpaulo@rpaulo_epsilon on 2007/05/06 21:10:15 > > > > > > We don't need any scheduler support because: > > > 1) msrtemp is a child of cpu - this implies that every > > > rdmsr/cpuid instruction will be executed on that CPU. > > > > No, that isn't true. You do need to use sched_bind() for that so you are > > really on the desired CPU when you read the MSR. > > I think he just needs msr of the cpu where curthread is executed, so > any scheduler lock should be needed. > If he needs to know msr of a particular CPU he really needs so, but it > doesn't seem the case. The sysctl is per-CPU, so he needs the msr from a specific CPU in the sysctl handler. I.e., it's like dev.cpu.0.temp or some such. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200705091543.33002.jhb>