Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:37:34 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] OsdSynch.c modernization Message-ID: <200709251737.38780.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200709251538.33353.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <200709181516.11207.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <46F7EDD6.4010508@root.org> <200709251538.33353.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 25 September 2007 03:38 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Monday 24 September 2007 01:03 pm, Nate Lawson wrote: > > Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > (At least on my laptop) I found the malloc() was called from > > > our code, i.e., AcpiOsExecute() from OsdSched.c. I'll try > > > something shortly cause I was going to rewrite the file anyway. > > > > Yep, that's because we need a task structure that's different for > > each call and acpi-ca doesn't like the "pending" argument (see > > OsdSchedule.c). One fix for this is to just use a hack and cast > > the fn to discard the extra arg. Not sure this would work. > > I quickly tested it but didn't work. :-( > > Actually it is not just pending argument but struct task itself has > to be allocated. I did crude hack to see if it is possible to have > it working with spin mutex gracefully. It can be done if we > pre-allocate some space for the tasks and use fast taskqueue. Does > it make sense to you? FYI, here is the hack: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/acpica/Osd.diff Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200709251737.38780.jkim>