Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:13:57 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, fredriks@Mcs.Net, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Silo overflows with SMP kernel Message-ID: <199706261813.NAA12413@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199706261621.JAA07792@phaeton.artisoft.com> from Terry Lambert at "Jun 26, 97 09:21:47 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Right now, I am working on finer grained VM locking which should be > > a first step on the VFS/VM high level side to make things better. (I am > > not one of the "main" SMP people, but am doing what I can do to support > > them.) > > Is this locking for which deadlock detection should be done, or is > it purely opportunistic? I ask because the locks probably need to > be checked agains non-VM locks for deadly embrace deadlocks, if it's > not. > Yep... That is where alot of the complexity is coming in. > > JOHN DYSON IS A STUD! > Not really, lets see how things work first :-). Also, if I was really a stud, I wouldn't be working on FreeBSD all night, but would have other interests :-). Now, I am working on FreeBSD for both my full time job and after hours... The stuff is going to be preliminary, and there is a lot of coordination that is needed between me and the "real" SMP crew. What I am doing is mostly going to be a "proposal" to both the SMP people, and my co-workers at work for review and criticism. As I know that you know, this has to be done correctly -- I really don't want to create another "interesting" thing like our VFS layering. :-). John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199706261813.NAA12413>