Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 08:51:03 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, David Greenman <dg@root.com>, freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP progress (was: Stepping on Toes) Message-ID: <20000706085103.P97425@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <200007051652.KAA14768@berserker.bsdi.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Wednesday, 5 July 2000 at 10:52:23 -0600, Chuck Paterson wrote:
>>
>> Jake Burkholder is porting the BSD/OS mutexes. I don't expect there
>> to be much of a difference in regards to your heavy-weight interrupt
>> work. I'm going to take a look at Jake's patchset tonight. I think
>> the only operational item we need to research is the sti/cli stuff in
>> the BSDI mutexes... we should be able to remove them at some point
>> (my interrupt code is already using the ipending mechanism to deal
>> with the scheduler mutex being active on the current cpu).
>>
>> If Jake's removed that, then we'll want to put it back in at some point
>> since it saves a significant amount of overhead ('sti' and 'cli' are
>> expensive instructions).
>>
>> -Matt
>> Matthew Dillon
>> <dillon@backplane.com>
>
>
> I believe ipending wants to go away totally. It really isn't
> meaningful in the thread environment and the locked operations
> needed to support it once multiple processor are running in the
> kernel are more expensive the sti, cli.
Agreed. I can't see any meaning in it, either.
Greg
--
Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000706085103.P97425>