Re: Giantless VFS.

On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 07:27:36PM +0100, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> Peter Schultz writes:
> > On Nov 22, 2004, at 8:15 AM, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> > 
> > >> I haven't received any feedback from the list though.  I hope people 
> > >> are
> > >> testing it.  Perhaps the silence indicates universal success? :-)
> > >
> > > Would it be interesting to try your patch on a UP system ?  To
> > > anticipate an hypotetical affirmative answer, I'm already recompiling 
> > > my
> > > UP kernel with it.
> > >
> > >
> > Reducing contention over the kernel is beneficial for any number of 
> > processors.
> > 
> 
> With a tree just updated per cvsup about 30 minutes ago:
> 
> root:peedub:sys:bash:8> patch < ~/freebsd/smpffs.diff
> root:peedub:sys:bash:7> find . -type f -name \*.rej | xargs ls -l
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  539 Nov 22 19:22 ./kern/init_sysent.c.rej
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  522 Nov 22 19:22 ./kern/syscalls.c.rej
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  524 Nov 22 19:22 ./sys/syscall.h.rej
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  557 Nov 22 19:22 ./sys/syscall.mk.rej
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  531 Nov 22 19:22 ./sys/sysproto.h.rej
> 
> :-(
> 
> I have the latest (only?) vesion of the patch.
> 

The rejected portions do not effect the patch.
It appears to be differences in the expansion of
$FreeBSD$.  I've been running a kernel with
this patch on a UP system.  It has exhibited 
no problems during a "make -j 2 buildworld", 
a re-installation of all ports on the system,
and a build and make check of the GCC cvs 
source tree.

-- 
Steve