Processor Sets as Processor Pools Putback Preparations?

I've now gotten some more feedback on my changes, and my project mentor Steve tells me that several others are interested in taking a look at my diffs. Approval for putting back a subsystem rewrite like this, even if it passes all tests and doesn't alter user APIs, takes longer than I have left on my internship. So most likely, if it goes back, it will be Steve's doing. But a number of people seem to really want this put back to the gate, and as a result I'm cleaning stuff up in preparation to hand it over.

• I sync'ed with the gate
• I filed a few CRs, which I'm now the RE for:
  • 6589839: libpool makes improper assumptions about property values
  • 6590370: RFE: processor sets (psets) should be implemented as temporary pools
  • 6590371: RFE: pools should be enabled at boot
  • 6590375: Some pools code doesn't pass muster for the updated cstyle
• I'm cleaning up now-spurious comments, and a few more of the artifacts from pools tracking previously being per-process rather than per-thread as it is with my changes, and the left-over remnants of pools being something with an on-off switch rather than being a core subsystem.
• As part of my cleanup, I'm also cleaning up the svc-pools script for the pools service, and making a couple libzonecfg changes since with pools always-on, some error handling and attempts to start the pools service are no longer needed
• I'm making an exhaustive list (which isn't that long) of final checklist items before filing a request to integrate (things like updating manpages to remove references to failure modes which no longer exist)

Also, tomorrow is the last day for my fellow kernel interns, Evan and Dan :-(

Posted by csg [Sun] ( August 09, 2007 01:47 PM ) Permalink | Comments[0]