bind on arm

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <20100221235408.GA65302 at ci0.org>
            Olivier Houchard <cognet at ci0.org> writes:
: On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 03:25:18PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <4B819F21.70907 at FreeBSD.org>
: >             Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org> writes:
: > : On 02/21/10 07:28, Olivier Houchard wrote:
: > : > Hi Doug,
: > : > 
: > : > I'd like to get the attached patch committed. It fixes the bind arm atomic
: > : > stuff in -CURRENT and RELENG_8. Some times ago, the RAS address was changed,
: > : > but it was hardcoded in the bind code and the change was never reflected.
: > : > The patch uses a macro, so that even if it happens again it won't be a problem.
: > : 
: > : First question (and I think the answer is yes, but I need to
: > : double-check) is it the consensus of the ARM gurus that this is the
: > : right solution? Second question, is this solution something that I can
: > : send upstream, both in the sense that I have permission to do so, and
: > : that it would be generally applicable to ARM on other OSs?
: > 
: > The fanciest way to cope would be to have a run-time check to see
: > which address to use.  This likely isn't worth the bother since the
: > user base is still relatively small (and none of the other atomics do
: > this).  The next best approach would be to include <machine/sysarch.h>
: > and use the value defined there for ARM_RAS_START and ARM_RAS_END.
: > Again, I've not double checked to make sure they are defined before,
: > but I think they are (or at least if they aren't defined, we know to
: > use the old value).
: > 
: 
: Actually, the patch I sent Doug does just that, it uses ARM_RAS_START
: (because it includes machine/atomic.h, which includes machine/sysarch.h).
: It should work for 7 as well, as ARM_RAS_START was defined too (but in
: machine/atomic.h)

Hmmm, missed that part of it...  Then yes, it is ready to go.

Warner