Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:11:53 +0200 From: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> To: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: removal of ipi_all() and ipi_self() [Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sparc64/include smp.h src/sys/sparc64/sparc64 genassym.c mp_machdep.c] Message-ID: <20080920231152.GA67442@alchemy.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <89B9A8BE-05F2-4DB2-B7B2-AB240AA9F0DD@mac.com> References: <200809181356.m8IDuaxT089888@repoman.freebsd.org> <200809181027.51997.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080918191947.GX94638@alchemy.franken.de> <89B9A8BE-05F2-4DB2-B7B2-AB240AA9F0DD@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:48:52PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > On Sep 18, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Marius Strobl wrote: > > >On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:27:51AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > >>On Thursday 18 September 2008 09:56:30 am Marius Strobl wrote: > >>>marius 2008-09-18 13:56:30 UTC > >>> > >>> FreeBSD src repository > >>> > >>> Modified files: > >>> sys/sparc64/include smp.h > >>> sys/sparc64/sparc64 genassym.c mp_machdep.c > >>> Log: > >>> SVN rev 183142 on 2008-09-18 13:56:30Z by marius > >>> > >>> - Newer firmware versions no longer provide SUNW,stop-self so just > >>> disable interrupts and loop forever with these. > >>> - Hide all MP-related bits in <machine/smp.h> underneath #ifdef > >>>SMP. > >>> - Inline ipi_all_but_self(9) and ipi_selected(9). We don't expose > >>>any > >>> additional bits but save a few cycles by doing so. > >>> - Remove ipi_all(9), which actually only called panic(9). It > >>>can't be > >>> implemented natively anyway and having it removed at least causes > >>> MI users to fail already fail when linking. > >> > >>Should we just remove ipi_all() completely? > >> > > > >Well, grepping in the CVS repository shows that there never was > >an actually consumer of ipi_all() (only #ifdef'ed out ones in > >ironically the sparc64 code) so it seems to be a good candidate > >for axing. Generally I can't think of a reason why MI code would > >want a CPU to send an IPI to itself. Actually, ipi_self() also > >isn't and never was used in MI code, only in ia64 and powerpc > >code for testing purposes. > > That's DS (=developer-specific) code rather than MI or MD code :-) > > Sending a test IPI to 'self' helps with bring-up or porting, but > serves no real purpose (other than maybe a POST-like purpose) > once IPIs are known to work... > Okay, I take these as a call for removing ipi_all() and ipi_self() along with the ia64 and powerpc test IPI code completely. A patch doing just that and which passes a universe build just fine is at: http://people.freebsd.org/~marius/nuke_ipi_all_self.diff Does anybody object to committing it? Should __FreeBSD_version be bumped for this? Marius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080920231152.GA67442>