Darren J Moffat wrote: > Is it safe to assume that this case will update all of the ON and other > Solaris consolidations that have code that uses lbolt/lbolt64 ?
We're updating all of ON with our putback, and we've been looking out for modules in other consolidations that reference them (6868799 and 6878074 are two examples of that). Our testing plan[1] is also helping us find instances of that problem. We've been in touch with RPE and ISV to make sure they know about this change, and to identify partners that should update their modules. > In the ZFS kernel module alone there are over 30 references to > lbolt/lblot64. > > Was any consideration given to providing something like this: > > #define lbolt ddi_get_lbolt() > #define lbolt64 ddi_get_lbolt64() > > The main reason for suggesting is based on a quick glance of where ZFS > uses lbolt and lbolt64 today those new function calls are going to cause > some ugly cstyle issues in a few places. We're making sure our changes clear cstyle and all pbchks. If there's a particular file or change you think can cause problems, please let us know. Thanks, Rafael [1]http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/tickless/Testing/clock_and_lbolt/
