Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 11:37:45 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> Cc: Sam Lawrance <boris@brooknet.com.au> Subject: Re: kern/78474 for 5.4? (kernel stack swapout problem again) Message-ID: <4269C309.30702@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20050422200102.G10333@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <1114052573.1075.10.camel@dirk.no.domain> <42678DC4.40309@freebsd.org> <20050422200102.G10333@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug White wrote: >On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, David Xu wrote: > > > >>Sam Lawrance wrote: >> >> >> >>>Will this problem: >>> >>>Swapped out procs not brought in immediately after child exits >>>http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/78474 >>> >>>be dealt with for the release of 5.4? >>> >>>Perhaps I'm the only FreeBSD user with swapped out processes ;-) >>> >>>-Sam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>I have noticed that current spinlock implementation no longer means that >>CPU must be in critical region (critical_enter is called), even previous >>hack TDP_WAKEPROC0 is no longer correct, :(, I think it is the time to >>disable swapout. >> >> > >I'm sorry, I can't parse your double negative. On -CURRENT critical >sections (entered with critical_enter()) no longer disable interrupts, but >do inhibit preemption. But spinlocks still do critical_enter() (see >spinlock_enter()). > > > I will commit the patch provided in the PR, it should work. I am just worrying TDP_WAKEPROC0 will not work if spinlock does not entering critical region.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4269C309.30702>