From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Mar 25 20: 7:50 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDFE737B986
	for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 20:07:43 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id UAA26945;
	Sat, 25 Mar 2000 20:07:34 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 20:07:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <200003260407.UAA26945@apollo.backplane.com>
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: smp-patch-06 (hopefully w/ proper syscall return handling) ready
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

    smp-patch-06 is now ready. 

	http://www.backplane.com/FreeBSD4/
	http://www.backplane.com/FreeBSD4/smp-patch-06.diff

    Bruce, I'd appreciate a quick review of my solution to the AST issue.
    Search for 'syscall_ast_exit' in i386/i386/exception.s after patching.

    I moved astpending to the per-cpu structure and made it a u_int.  I then
    test it in the syscall code and, if non-zero, it obtains the MP lock,
    pushes the dummy state, and jumps to _doreti.

    (This patch also adds lots of comments to the assembly).

    I am also in need of some C code to test it.  I *think* the below code
    will test it, but I'm not sure.  Bruce?

							-Matt

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/errno.h>

#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>

int
main(int ac, char **av)
{
    signal(SIGALRM, (void *)-1);
    alarm(1);
    for (;;)
        ;
}




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