svn commit: r280785 - in head/sys: kern netgraph/atm/sscop netgraph/atm/uni sys

[Julian Elischer]

On 4/1/15 12:01 AM, Eric van Gyzen wrote:
>>> Now as to the
>>>
>>> -1 -> NOCPU
>>>
>>> This is like pulling on a string on your sweater.. the only sensible solution that
>>> I could come up with after chatting with Lawrence is to add
>>> #include <sys/proc.h>
>>> to everyone that uses the callout.h and does not have it already… (putting it into callout.h does not work) .. sigh..
>>>
>>> Now for this cosmetic change I end up with the following changes (and as yet I have
>>> not built LINT or universe so there may be more).. I have spent about 2 hours on this
>>> so far and I can at least build a kernel with the change for amd64 :-0
>>>
>>> Here is what has to change, do you really think that this is worth it?
>>>
>>> Note I did not look into moving NOCPU in proc.h it says it means no CPU is present
>>> which is sort of the meaning we want.. I am not sure if the define could be moved .. but
>>> that too may be yet another string...
>>>
>>> Is this worth it, or do you have another idea on how best to do this???
>> Ugh. :(  I guess leave it at -1 for now.
> If you leave it as -1, you might add a /* NOCPU */ comment, for the sake of
> grep.  (This could be a lost cause, for all I know, but it can't hurt.)
>
>> Another alternative would be to
>> move NOCPU to <sys/param.h> (at least for the kernel) if bde@ would allow it.
>> I don't think changing all those files is appropriate.
>>
>> (Also, <sys/proc.h> seems like an odd place for NOCPU now, it should really be
>> in <sys/smp.h> if not param.h.  I understand why it was first added in proc.h,
>> but it is now used in many more places than just td_oncpu.)
> +1
move it.. I think I may have added it for td_oncpu but I'm not going 
to look it up.
>
> Eric
>
>
>