svn commit: r210054 - in head/sys: conf kern x86/x86

[John Baldwin]

On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 2:35:48 pm Alexander Motin wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 1:01:14 pm Alexander Motin wrote:
> >> John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 11:59:46 am Alexander Motin wrote:
> >>>> John Baldwin wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:31:27 am Alexander Motin wrote:
> >>>>>> Author: mav
> >>>>>> Date: Wed Jul 14 13:31:27 2010
> >>>>>> New Revision: 210054
> >>>>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/210054
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Log:
> >>>>>>   Move timeevents.c to MI code, as it is not x86-specific. I already have
> >>>>>>   it working on Marvell ARM SoCs, and it would be nice to unify timer 
> >>> code
> >>>>>>   between more platforms.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Added:
> >>>>>>   head/sys/kern/timeevents.c
> >>>>>>      - copied unchanged from r210053, head/sys/x86/x86/timeevents.c
> >>>>>> Deleted:
> >>>>>>   head/sys/x86/x86/timeevents.c
> >>>>>> Modified:
> >>>>>>   head/sys/conf/files.amd64
> >>>>>>   head/sys/conf/files.i386
> >>>>>>   head/sys/conf/files.pc98
> >>>>> Can this be merged with kern_et.c, 
> >>>> They are different. kern_et.c provides event timer drivers API,
> >>>> timeevents.c consumes it to manage kernel clocks. kern_et.c
> >>>> theoretically can be used without timeevents.c if some other code
> >>>> consume timers, for example, exposing them to user-level.
> >>>>
> >>>> May be names indeed cryptic a bit, but I had no better ideas.
> >>>>
> >>>>> or perhaps called subr_eventtimers.c instead?
> >>>> Whatever you like, but why exactly so and why "subr_" important?
> >>> The vast majority of files in sys/kern use some sort of prefix, either sys_*, 
> >>> kern_*, subr_*, etc.  subr_ was just a suggestion to avoid clashing with 
> >>> kern_et.c.  If timeevents.c is specific to clocks then maybe it should have 
> >>> 'clock' in its name somehow?  Right now having kern_et == kern_eventtimer.c 
> >>> and timeevents.c is a bit ambiguous.  Somehow making it clear that 
> >>> timeevents.c is for clocks might help.
> >> We already have kern_clock.c and subr_clock.c. kern_clock.c is quite
> >> close by meaning. What's about kern_clocksource.c?
> > 
> > Ok.  I assume it would not be easy to just merge this file into kern_clock.c
> > itself?
> 
> At least not until all architectures will adapt to it.

Do you think that is the long term goal?  If so, you could put this code into
kern_clock.c and selectively enable it with a macro defined in
<machine/param.h> as a temporary measure until all platforms have adopted it.

-- 
John Baldwin