Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 01:02:12 GMT From: John Birrell <jb@FreeBSD.org> To: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: PERFORCE change 102622 for review Message-ID: <200607280102.k6S12Cgp051848@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=102622 Change 102622 by jb@jb_freebsd2 on 2006/07/28 01:01:47 If the kernel CPU_SNAPSHOT option is defined, then take a snapshot of the per-cpu registers for each cpu switch. Yes, this will have a performance hit. It is anly intended to help diagnose what is going on when IPI's remain unacked. Once that problem is solved this code will be removed and CVS will have no record of it. Trust me, I know these things. 8-) Affected files ... .. //depot/projects/dtrace/src/sys/sun4v/sun4v/swtch.S#2 edit Differences ... ==== //depot/projects/dtrace/src/sys/sun4v/sun4v/swtch.S#2 (text+ko) ==== @@ -27,12 +27,18 @@ #include <machine/asm.h> __FBSDID("$FreeBSD: src/sys/sparc64/sparc64/swtch.S,v 1.33 2004/05/26 12:06:52 tmm Exp $"); +#include "opt_cpu_snapshot.h" + #include <machine/asi.h> #include <machine/asmacros.h> #include <machine/ktr.h> #include <machine/tstate.h> #include <machine/hypervisorvar.h> +#ifdef CPU_SNAPSHOT +#include <machine/cpu_snapshot.h> +#endif + #include "assym.s" .register %g2, #ignore @@ -226,8 +232,18 @@ /* * Done. Return and load the new process's window from the stack. */ -5: ret +5: +#ifdef CPU_SNAPSHOT + restore + +#include "machine/cpu_snapshot_save.h" + + retl + nop +#else + ret restore +#endif END(cpu_switch) ENTRY(savectx)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200607280102.k6S12Cgp051848>