Searched hist:253604 (Results 1 - 9 of 9) sorted by relevance
| /freebsd-10.1-release/sys/gdb/ | ||
| H A D | gdb_cons.c | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| /freebsd-10.1-release/sys/ofed/include/linux/ | ||
| H A D | module.h | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| /freebsd-10.1-release/sys/kern/ | ||
| H A D | kern_ntptime.c | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| H A D | sched_4bsd.c | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| H A D | init_main.c | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| /freebsd-10.1-release/sys/sys/ | ||
| H A D | sched.h | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| H A D | kernel.h | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| /freebsd-10.1-release/sys/vm/ | ||
| H A D | vm.h | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
| H A D | vm_glue.c | diff 253604 Wed Jul 24 07:57:15 MDT 2013 avg rename scheduler->swapper and SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER->SI_SUB_LAST Also directly call swapper() at the end of mi_startup instead of relying on swapper being the last thing in sysinits order. Rationale: - "RUN_SCHEDULER" was misleading, scheduling already takes place at that stage - "scheduler" was misleading, the function swaps in the swapped out processes - another SYSINIT(SI_SUB_RUN_SCHEDULER, SI_ORDER_ANY) could never be invoked depending on its relative order with scheduler; this was not obvious and the bug actually used to exist Reviewed by: kib (ealier version) MFC after: 14 days |
Completed in 333 milliseconds