From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Oct  4 10:19:02 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5217D16A419
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu,  4 Oct 2007 10:19:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BCE113C474
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu,  4 Oct 2007 10:19:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192)
	id 209631A4D87; Thu,  4 Oct 2007 03:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 03:19:02 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
To: Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no>
Message-ID: <20071004101902.GN31826@elvis.mu.org>
References: <20071003015231.GJ31826@elvis.mu.org> <86zlyzqmgo.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20071004094821.GM31826@elvis.mu.org> <86ejgbqjvr.fsf@ds4.des.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <86ejgbqjvr.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Critical Sections for userland.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:19:02 -0000

* Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no> [071004 03:01] wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> writes:
> > Do you have:
> >
> > a) Evidence or a paper to prove that this is a bad idea?
> 
> I need evidence or a paper to prove that it is a bad idea to allow a
> userland process to hold the CPU indefinitely?
> 
> > b) A helpful suggestion?
> 
> Why don't you tell us what you're actually trying to do, so we can tell
> you how to do it.
> 
> > c) An obvious understanding of the problem?
> 
> I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

It's not worth my time to engage someone with your mind set, you
posses neither the technical nor interpersonal skill to be useful
to me.

For context see my replies in this thread to Kip Macy which explains
how one deals with the false-problems you mention.

For evidence of existing, however suboptimal, run-to-completion
systems see the RTPRIO scheduling knobs.

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein