Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 06:25:06 -0800 From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys ktr.h src/sys/kern kern_clock.c kern_switch.c Message-ID: <43A57142.1070207@root.org> In-Reply-To: <43A47F96.5040304@samsco.org> References: <200512170357.jBH3vAhh030893@repoman.freebsd.org> <200512171445.04475.jhb@freebsd.org> <43A47F96.5040304@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: > >> On Friday 16 December 2005 10:57 pm, Nate Lawson wrote: >> >>> njl 2005-12-17 03:57:10 UTC >>> >>> FreeBSD src repository >>> >>> Modified files: >>> sys/sys ktr.h >>> sys/kern kern_clock.c kern_switch.c >>> Log: >>> Clean up unused or poorly utilized KTR values. Remove KTR_FS, >>> KTR_KGDB, >>> and KTR_IO as they were never used. Remove KTR_CLK since it was only >>> used for hardclock firing and use KTR_INTR there instead. Remove >>> KTR_CRITICAL since it was only used for crit enter/exit and use >>> KTR_CONTENTION instead. >> >> >> >> Actually, I thought I had mentioned that KTR_CRITICAL should stay as >> it is (well, and the larger thought about doing away with the entire >> bitmask concept which no one responded to). critical_enter/exit are >> not related in the least to KTR_CONTENTION which is used for >> MUTEX_PROFILING, nor do they have anything at all to do with >> contention of any sort. If you must stick them somewhere, put them in >> KTR_SCHED instead. I think scottl@ recently added support to >> schedgraph for those traces anyway (though I'm not sure if they are in >> his local tree or CVS). >> > > Yes, it's in CVS. In the big scheme of things, it's probably a good > idea to put KTR_CRITICAL in the same domain as KTR_SCHED. And yeah, it > has nothing to do with KTR_CONTENTION. It was this part of the drive-by > commit that irritated me most. A simple email saying, "I'm about to do > this, please review," would have have been welcomed and likely not even > ignored. I fear I've been phk'd. You asked why I didn't ask for comments and I directed you to the thread on arch@ where I asked for comments. cvs annotate didn't show either of you anywhere near the KTR_CRITICAL stuff, except I know in the past John has worked on critical sections not disabling interrupts. I did my best to take into account his comments in a minimal way. So, relax, you're not being attacked, and I'll continue to fix this today. -- Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43A57142.1070207>