I have a fairly large but mostly simple patch which changes the stats
collected in uvmexp for faults, intrs, softs, syscalls, and traps from
32 bit to 64 bits and puts them in cpu_data (in cpu_info). This makes
more accurate and a little cheaper to update on 64bit systems.
I hvaen't
On Mon Dec 13 2010 at 00:24:49 +, Alexander Nasonov wrote:
Hi,
In sys/uvm/uvm_fault.c I see three KASSERT's twice:
Removed one set. Thanks.
--
älä karot toivorikkauttas, kyl rätei ja lumpui piisaa
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Martin Husemann wrote:
I have one stupid question: why can't we leave the size of the counters
at 32bit on a per arch basis?
Or use 64-bit counters but just update the lower 32-bits of them. Is
there some danger that a 32-bit counter will overflow?
At a quick glance
On Dec 15, 2010, at 1:53 AM, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
The diffs are at http://www.netbsd.org/uvmexp-diff.txt
Purely cosmetic comments:
- why are most of the cpu_nsoft count commented out?
Because we were counting
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 08:49:14PM -0800, Matt Thomas wrote:
I have a fairly large but mostly simple patch which changes the
stats collected in uvmexp for faults, intrs, softs, syscalls, and
traps from 32 bit to 64 bits and puts them in cpu_data (in
cpu_info). This makes more accurate and
