From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 9 02:24:44 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF8F037B401 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 02:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exchhz01.viatech.com.cn (ip-167-164-97-218.anlai.com [218.97.164.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BFF543FAF for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 02:24:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Received: from davidw2k (ip-240-1-168-192.rev.dyxnet.com [192.168.1.240]) by exchhz01.viatech.com.cn with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id HLDQPSCT; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 17:10:29 +0800 Message-ID: <002c01c2fe7a$0a1f16b0$f001a8c0@davidw2k> From: "David Xu" To: "Daniel Eischen" References: Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 17:26:02 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 cc: Julian Elischer cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Scope system threads (was Re: PS_BLOCKED) X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 09:24:45 -0000 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Daniel Eischen" To: "David Xu" Cc: "Julian Elischer" ; = Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 12:26 PM Subject: Re: Scope system threads (was Re: PS_BLOCKED) > On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, David Xu wrote: >=20 > > Daniel, > >=20 > > These are optimizations, right? >=20 > For the most part, yes. But I thought I'd enumerate what I'd > like to see. >=20 > > Could we stablize the libpthread before optimizing it? > > Is per-kse problem resolved? I don't stick to this,=20 >=20 > I'm working on it now. It seems to be working, but I've got to go > through the rest of the files to make sure we don't assume that > thread->kse is consistent. >=20 > > and if you think it should be resolved now, I would like to > > work on it. >=20 > There are two things that I know of that need fixing/looking at. > One is signals which we've already talked about. The other is > getting the remaining ACE tests to pass. There seems to be > 3 or 4 that fail and I can't seem to follow the C++ code well > enough to figure out where. Have you ever built ACE? I've > got an older version that I'm using (version 5.2 I think). > My patches to get it to compile are at: >=20 > http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/ace5.2_patches >=20 > If a call to sigqueue() in the source code causes a compile failure, > just change it to kill(). Read the top-level ACE_INSTALL file; > you have to add a couple of links before compiling. Also, it > wouldn't build from the top-level; I just cd'd into > ACE_Wrappers/ace and did a gmake there, and then into > ACE_Wrappers/tests and also gmake. >=20 > If you could debug those that would help a lot. >=20 OK, I can use C++. I did ever use ACE, I will try ACE 5.2. > I'll get another patch set up as soon as I can. I'd like to > commit as soon as we get signals and the ACE bugs figured out. > Then we can work on getting multiple KSEs and KSEGs going. > The code is mostly there; probably needs to be reworked a bit > (along with more debugging). >=20 > --=20 > Dan Eischen