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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-smp@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-smp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"