From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Dec 27 11:40:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A90037B405 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:40:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20011227194008.DOIC6450.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 19:40:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA88703; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:34:44 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the condvar stuff. In-Reply-To: <20011227131953.C55891@elvis.mu.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Julian Elischer [011227 11:40] wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > > > > For now you should just consider using the existing mechanisms, > > > something like a posted signal and not worry about the uninterruptable > > > sleeps. > > > > That's what I'm doing.... > > Good, I don't want you killing yourself working on this, we need > you around to help flush out the bugs. :) > > > > > Basically one of the changes I'll be doing in the KSE tree > > > > as that all msleeps and cv waits and sx waits and mutx waits have > > > > to either be identifiable as uninterruptable, or ba capable of > > > > being interrupted (so at least the next layer can catch it and back out). > > > > > > Yes, this is what PCATCH is for. > > > > I know, I'm just dissapointed at the ease that I have in finding cases > > where all I can do is wait... > > :-/ > > It's UNIX dude. :) > > If you use the existing PCATCH/cv_sig (at least for now) you'll be > all good and a lot cleaner than fixing all the places with > uninterruptable sleeps. On cases with timeouts I'm accelerating the timelut. in _sig cases I'm similating a signal. if it's neither, I guess I'll just have to leave it. (the exit will never complete if the thread never leaves the CV.) > > -- > -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] > 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," > start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' > Tax deductable donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message