* Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070831 01:51] wrote: > 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.
Ah, yes, sorry, the API stuff is the sleep_queue and turnstile apis, not the sx api itself. -Alfred _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
