Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 15:45:11 -0800 From: Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> Cc: Rafal Jaworowski <raj@freebsd.org>, Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 132485 for review Message-ID: <47816807.90907@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4CCF7BFD-9DD3-4D69-8113-D5DC3E8F4B27@mac.com> References: <200801041525.m04FPIrt011288@repoman.freebsd.org> <47815371.9020501@freebsd.org> <4CCF7BFD-9DD3-4D69-8113-D5DC3E8F4B27@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'm planning this. I have done the same on ia64. It helps SMP, because > after you switched the BSP to its own stack kstack0 becomes available to start > APs on (in particular before you have the MMU set up)... > > FYI, Great ! I would expect that some OFW calls may blow up with leakage of params on the kernel virtual stack instead of on the 1:1 stack, but that needs to be fixed anyways. later, Peter.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47816807.90907>