Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:53:42 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 dump_machdep.c Message-ID: <20021217005342.GA27317@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0212161516260.11938-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0212161505500.47122-100000@root.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0212161516260.11938-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 03:19:12PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > Functionally, it is important that this check be MI. > > I thought about that. > Different architectures can have different dump sizes (theoretically) > so only the MD code can know how much room it needs. > For example, ia64 might decide to implement sparse dumps. Different architectures already have different dump sizes, because both ia64 and sparc64 have sparse memory dumps and each has overhead to keep track of the memory chunks. ia64 uses ELF as the container, sparc64 has something else. So, yes; the check has to be MD. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021217005342.GA27317>