Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c (fwd)

From: Tony Arcieri <tarcieri_at_atmos.colostate.edu> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:01:19 -0700 · This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:24 UTC

On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 03:32:14PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Scott Long wrote:
> 
 > I'm definitely not against these fixes going into RELENG_5, but I would
> > like to see some significant testing be applied to them in HEAD first,
> > especially to changes that are not confined to just sched_ule.c (and
> > sched_4bsd.c).
> 
> Can I commit changes that are restricted to sched_ule.c?  It certainly
> can't make things any worse than they are on RELENG_5 now.  We can leave
> the #error in until it's really tested on head.  That way only people who
> remove that line of code can use it.

The changes to kern_sig.c are also necessary to ensure the stability of
the ULE scheduler, correct?  I guess I'll just keep running with a kernel
build with RELENG_5 sources and sched_ule.c, kern_switch.c, and 
kern_sig.c from head.

And am I correct that the UMA implementation in RELENG_5 has rendered
proc_fini() obsolete and thus it won't ever be called?

Tony Arcieri