From 608f44306a6f0d5692f5c81bcbfe7a621ec254ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kimplul <kimi.h.kuparinen@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 21:02:52 +0300
Subject: implement bkl

+ Start out using big kernel lock, apparently seL4 thinks its good
  enough. I might have a go at using a more fair lock, and possibly
  moving to more fine-grained locks if I really feel the need to get
  scalability up.
---
 src/main.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

(limited to 'src/main.c')

diff --git a/src/main.c b/src/main.c
index 506d7fe..33d9596 100644
--- a/src/main.c
+++ b/src/main.c
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #include <kmi/debug.h>
 #include <kmi/vmem.h>
 #include <kmi/irq.h>
+#include <kmi/bkl.h>
 #include <arch/arch.h>
 #include <arch/proc.h>
 #include <arch/smp.h>
@@ -60,6 +61,8 @@ __noreturn void kernel(void *fdt, uintptr_t load_addr, struct vmem *d)
 	/* we should be in kernelspace, so use the virtual address of our FDT. */
 	fdt = __va(fdt);
 
+	bkl_lock();
+
 	/* dbg uses direct mapping at this point */
 	init_dbg(fdt);
 	/* start up debugging in kernel IO */
@@ -101,6 +104,8 @@ __noreturn void main(unsigned long hart, void *fdt, uintptr_t load_addr)
 	 * have to get the function signature right */
 	(void)hart;
 
+	/** @todo some kind of lottery? */
+
 	pm_t ram_base = __fdt_ram_base(fdt);
 	pm_t ram_size = __fdt_ram_size(fdt);
 	set_ram_base(ram_base);
-- 
cgit v1.3