> On Oct 30, 2015, at 03:15, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
>
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:04:36 +0100
> Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
>>> On 10/30/15 08:41, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100
>>> Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>>
On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:04:36 +0100
Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On 10/30/15 08:41, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100
> > Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will a
On 10/30/15 08:41, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100
Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some
H> point have API's diverging from Linux, to fit BSD API's better.
This statemen
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:28:51 +0100
Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> >> The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some
> > H> point have API's diverging from Linux, to fit BSD API's better.
> >
> > This statement makes the name of LinuxK
On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some
H> point have API's diverging from Linux, to fit BSD API's better.
This statement makes the name of LinuxKPI quite pointless, as well
as the whole idea of the KPI unclear.
Hi,
To be mo
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 04:06:11PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
H> On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
H> > H> The parameters for bus_bind_intr() are not available outside the
H> > H> LinuxKPI. To support such a functionality we should wrap it, for the
H> > H> sake of maintainability.
H> >
On 10/29/15 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
H> The parameters for bus_bind_intr() are not available outside the
H> LinuxKPI. To support such a functionality we should wrap it, for the
H> sake of maintainability.
H>
H> The LinuxKPI is not a binary compatibility module, and will at some
H> point have A
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 09:08:41AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
H> >> Log:
H> >>Add support for binding IRQs to CPUs in the LinuxKPI. The new function
H> >>added is for BSD only and does not exist in Linux.
H> >
H> > um, then who would use it and why?
H>
H> The parameters for bus_bind
On 10/28/15 03:14, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 10/26/15 9:28 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Author: hselasky
Date: Mon Oct 26 13:28:34 2015
New Revision: 290003
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/290003
Log:
Add support for binding IRQs to CPUs in the LinuxKPI. The new function
On 10/26/15 9:28 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Author: hselasky
Date: Mon Oct 26 13:28:34 2015
New Revision: 290003
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/290003
Log:
Add support for binding IRQs to CPUs in the LinuxKPI. The new function
added is for BSD only and does not exist in
Author: hselasky
Date: Mon Oct 26 13:28:34 2015
New Revision: 290003
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/290003
Log:
Add support for binding IRQs to CPUs in the LinuxKPI. The new function
added is for BSD only and does not exist in Linux.
MFC after:1 week
Sponsored by: Me
11 matches
Mail list logo