Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 Jul 2000 22:39:18 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        cp@bsdi.com (Chuck Paterson)
Cc:        eischen@vigrid.com (Daniel Eischen), grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), jasone@canonware.com (Jason Evans), luoqi@watermarkgroup.com (Luoqi Chen), smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: SMP meeting summary
Message-ID:  <200007052239.PAA26386@usr05.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <200007031528.JAA26798@berserker.bsdi.com> from "Chuck Paterson" at Jul 03, 2000 09:28:34 AM

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 	In general there ought not to be multiple processes piling
> up on a mutex. If there are and for some reason they can't be
> fixed then these particular mutexs are going to dictate how this
> area is handled. Once we have these cases in hand we can make
> some decisions as to how to proceed.

The atime mutex on directories in which parallel compiles are
being attempted, when one uses data protection instead of
critical sectioning as the reason for the mutex.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007052239.PAA26386>