Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 06 Sep 2000 19:37:51 +0200
From:      Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Sept 5th patch ... 
Message-ID:  <200009061737.e86Hbqd08340@grimreaper.grondar.za>
In-Reply-To: <200009060638.e866ckG49084@netplex.com.au> ; from Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>  "Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:38:46 MST."
References:  <200009060638.e866ckG49084@netplex.com.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Remember, the i386 kernel is now running with *NO SUCH THING AS SPLxxx()* -
> interrupt handlers have to do a process context switch and compete for the
> giant lock while before doing their interrupt work.  There is a lot of
> overhead ehere.

So, are there going to be some documented guidelines for us neophyte
kernel-hackers? I have just gotten used to the splfoo()/splx() idea,
and now its gone. How, now, do we write canonical code that doesn't
futz with itself when interrupts/threads/processes happen?

M
--
Mark Murray
Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org


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?200009061737.e86Hbqd08340>