Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:34:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: David Greenman <dg@root.com> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP changes and breaking kld object module compatibility Message-ID: <200004232034.NAA64288@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200004232025.NAA06779@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
: :>:> There's another good reason to MFC the linux patch on wednesday... :>:> that is, to do it at the same time the SMP cleanup is MFC'd, and that :>:> is because both patch sets require the linux kernel module to be :>:> recompiled and I'd rather not force people to do that twice. :>:> :>:> The SMP patchset, in fact, requires that all kernel modules be :>:> recompiled due to the locks that were removed from the spl*() macros. : : I wonder if they really must be recompiled. It sounds like that would :improve performance, but is seems like gratuitous locking in this area :wouldn't necessarily cause things to break. : :-DG : :David Greenman :Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org The cpl, cml, and interrupt lock variables and initialization of such is gone, Kapoof. And the semantics have changed for a few things as well. I haven't actually tested it to see if old modules still load and operate properly because doing the testing properly would take more time then I have to spend. If a KLD doesn't use spl*() calls at all it may be ok. I think we should resign ourselves to recompiling the KLD's, though. -Matt Matthew Dillon <dillon@backplane.com> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200004232034.NAA64288>