In article <98f6e9a8-9d9a-4238-8521-6d86d0f84...@me.com>,
Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 14, 2020, at 2:37 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>
>> So what's the short term solution?
>>
>> - Don't define {MIN,MAX}_PAGE_SIZE on m68k?
>> - Define a different constant?
>> - Add a define to tell uvm to
> On Jan 14, 2020, at 2:37 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
> So what's the short term solution?
>
> - Don't define {MIN,MAX}_PAGE_SIZE on m68k?
> - Define a different constant?
> - Add a define to tell uvm to ignore {MIN,MAX}_PAGE_SIZE?
#ifdef _KERNEL, define {MIN,MAX}_PAGE_SIZE to a constant t
In article <6b8ca202-14f6-4ffb-8a78-d2a473645...@me.com>,
Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 14, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>
>> We do this to save space, but as you say, not important for now. Perhaps
>> the expedient solution is to define MALLOC_PAGE_SIZE...
>
>I'd rather keep
> On Jan 14, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
> We do this to save space, but as you say, not important for now. Perhaps
> the expedient solution is to define MALLOC_PAGE_SIZE...
I'd rather keep the use of these constants separate... who knows what they
might be used for in the fu
On Jan 14, 8:54am, thor...@me.com (Jason Thorpe) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: MAX_PAGE_SIZE for m68k (Re: CVS commit:src/sys/arch/arm/inclu
|
|
| > On Jan 14, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Izumi Tsutsui wrot=
| e:
| >=20
| >> b) Modules should be built such that they can use a non-fixed PAGE_SIZE.=
|
| >=20
|
> On Jan 14, 2020, at 8:41 AM, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
>
>> b) Modules should be built such that they can use a non-fixed PAGE_SIZE.
>
> No, this is not necessary, because modules are built for each $MACHINE
> and (a) each $MACHINE has fixed PAGE_SIZE.
Yes, understood. I think it would eventua
> > The arm PAGE_SIZE_{MIN,MAX} should go away after nick eliminates the
> > need for the 8K pages. This leaves us with m68k to deal with...
> > Do modules work on m68k?
Yes, at least on NetBSD/news68k 9.0_RC1:
(though something wrong in modunload(8))
---
# uname -a
NetBSD 9.0_RC1 NetBSD 9.0_RC1
On 2020/01/10 15:59, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 9, 2020, at 9:02 PM, Masanobu SAITOH wrote:
>>
>> The reason why I moved stge_softc to if_stgereg.h was that ipgphy.c
>> required to check stge's chip revision. So, if there is no any objection,
>> I'll make new if_stgevar.h and share it wit
