| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
| |
ok visa@, kettenis@
|
|
|
|
| |
OK dlg@
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
years ago.
ok dlg@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
each arch used to have to provide an rw_cas operation, but now we
have the rwlock code build its own version. on smp machines it uses
atomic_cas_ulong. on uniproc machines it avoids interlocked
instructions by using straight loads and stores. this is safe because
rwlocks are only used from process context and processes are currently
not preemptible in our kernel. so alpha/ppc/etc might get a benefit.
ok miod@ kettenis@ deraadt@
|
|
|
|
| |
ok dlg@ mpi@ deraadt@
|
|
|
|
| |
ok kettenis@
|
|
|
|
| |
part of the future we have planned. middling ok from a few
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed and okay drahn@. Okay deraadt@.
|
|
|
|
| |
Positive test results by a handful of people. Ok kettenis@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Not sure what's more surprising: how long it took for NetBSD to
catch up to the rest of the BSDs (including UCB), or the amount of
code that NetBSD has claimed for itself without attributing to the
actual authors.
OK deraadt@
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
miod@ ok
|
|
done by me, niklas and others. Especially wrt. NXE support.
Still needs some polishing, especially in dmesg messages, but we're now
building kernel faster than ever.
|