[Reviving an old thread]
Hi Sean,
On 1/3/17 5:18 PM, Sean Bruno wrote:
> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>
> I almost feel like the e
On 01/05/17 09:11, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 5 January 2017 at 16:03, Sean Bruno wrote:
>> Ok, this is probably too big for a single patch. I'll see if its
>> reasonable to break this up across *some* kind of logic boundary.
>
> Yeah, that's pretty huge. My rough rule of thumb: prefer
> each p
On 5 January 2017 at 16:03, Sean Bruno wrote:
> Ok, this is probably too big for a single patch. I'll see if its
> reasonable to break this up across *some* kind of logic boundary.
Yeah, that's pretty huge. My rough rule of thumb: prefer
each patch to be <500 lines, prefer <20 patches in a patch
On 01/03/17 09:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
>
> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>
> I almost feel like the existing code should be purged,
On 01/05/17 04:33, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 January 2017 at 16:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
>> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
>> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
>> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>>
>> I
On 3 January 2017 at 16:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>
> I almost feel like the existing code should be purg
On 4 January 2017 at 18:32, Alex Bennée wrote:
> Apart from syscall mapping and backend calls to the BSD ABI what
> differences are there between the two user-mode implementations?
I'm a bit wary of sharing code between the two just because
I think we'd end up breaking bsd-user all the time becau
On 01/04/17 11:32, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Sean Bruno writes:
>
>> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
>> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
>> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>
> Also don't forget the para
Sean Bruno writes:
> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
Also don't forget the parallel_cpus changes which were made for enhanced
atomic
On 01/03/17 23:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 03.01.2017 18:11, Sean Bruno wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/03/17 09:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
>>> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
>>> working agai
On 03.01.2017 18:11, Sean Bruno wrote:
>
>
> On 01/03/17 09:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
>>
>> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
>> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
>> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>>
>> I almo
On 01/03/17 09:18, Sean Bruno wrote:
>
> I'm pondering where to start with getting FreeBSD's bsd-user code into
> shape so it could actually be reviewed and accepted now that its sort of
> working again (signal handling fixed finally).
>
> I almost feel like the existing code should be purged,
12 matches
Mail list logo
