svn commit: r199067 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 i386/i386

Kostik Belousov kostikbel at
Wed Nov 11 22:33:49 UTC 2009

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:56:51PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote:
> Hi,
> * Jun Kuriyama <kuriyama at> wrote:
> > Can you test with these patches?  Testing on only one of both system
> > is enough.  "patch-1" forces disabling CLFLUSH feature even if SS bit
> > exists.  "patch-2" forces no CLFLUSH tweak.  I'd like to know with
> > which patch your system can live.
> For some reason they both seem to boot. Yikes. I've done some more
> testing and it seems the old version even hangs if I add some additional
> printf's above and below, which makes me believe the problem is a bit
> more complex than we realize...

The only thing I see now is that TUNABLE_INT declaration is not needed,
since SYSINIT is started after hammer_time(), so TUNABLE_FETCH is
processed after everything is done for BSP.

Wait, are your machines SMP ? Hmm, could you, please, remove TUNABLE_INT()
and see how it ends up ?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the svn-src-all mailing list