From owner-freebsd-arch Sat May 27 3:44:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.92]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AB6637B88D for ; Sat, 27 May 2000 03:44:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from nlsys.demon.co.uk ([158.152.125.33] helo=herring.nlsystems.com) by anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 12ve5N-000AwU-0Y; Sat, 27 May 2000 11:44:54 +0100 Received: from salmon.nlsystems.com (salmon.nlsystems.com [10.0.0.3]) by herring.nlsystems.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA69538; Sat, 27 May 2000 11:51:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 11:50:13 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson To: Chuck Paterson Cc: Matthew Dillon , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Terry Lambert , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Preemptive kernel on older X86 hardware In-Reply-To: <200005251700.LAA25373@berserker.bsdi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 25 May 2000, Chuck Paterson wrote: > } > } Lets use subroutines during development at least, it will make > } things easier. I don't think anyone can argue with that :-) > } > > Almost.) I certainly think that the actually locking > stuff can be in a function but we really want to wrap the > function in a macro so we can put tracing in. Being able > to look at a trace and see file and line numbers for mutex > locks and unlocks is invaluable. Absolutely. If using functions, it might also be a good idea to wrap with an inline which checks for M_SPIN or M_DEF and calls a different implementation function for each. This might allow a slightly more efficient implementation. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 20 8442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message