In message <20060113025358.GA24989@panix.com>Thor Lancelot Simon writes
>On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:45:29PM -0500, Chapman Flack wrote:
>> 
>> Should the last argument in line 373 be &kcq_softclock?  Looks
>> almost like a copy and paste artifact. Apparently doesn't break
>> much of anything, as it's been that way since 1.1 - but it makes
>> me wonder.
>
>I don't think anything in the tree uses kconts.  They were intended
>to replace the hand-coded continuations in the FAST_IPSEC code, and
>there's also a splice() implementation that uses them, but it's all
>been on hold for years because we can't establish a single ipl hierarchy
>across ports, and the generic kcont code doesn't work without that.

also reworking one port (macppc?) to use GENERIC_SOFTINTS, so we can
replacek them with kconts.  (Or just go direct to kconts, when that
becomes feasible...)

>It has to happen.  I hope someone causes it to -- soon.