Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 17:03:28 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> Cc: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD* mutex summary Message-ID: <39287950.167EB0E7@elischer.org> References: <200005191923.MAA09426@mass.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith wrote:
>
> Given the recent exercise over the proposed kernel thread architecture,
> where after much discussion and the invention of a great deal of new
> terminology we basically reinvented scheduler activations (described in a
> 10 year old paper), I think that cleaving to existing terminology is
> probably a good idea.
>
I didn't use the existing terminology deliberatly so that we
wouldn't get preconcieved notions of how various components
would behave. The aim was that when we had narrowed down what
we wanted, we'd figure out what 'normal' nomenclature would
best fit. This in fact happenned. If you ask jason,
we are basically now using the terms from the SA paper.
--
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ julian@elischer.org
( OZ ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/ presently in: Perth
v
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39287950.167EB0E7>