From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 11 01:11:41 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42F937B401 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6330943F3F for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:11:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from interjet.elischer.org (12-232-168-4.client.attbi.com[12.232.168.4]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with ESMTP id <2003041108114005200lhim0e>; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:11:40 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA95419; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 01:11:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Jeff Roberson In-Reply-To: <20030411034715.T37530-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: KSE signals broken by 1:1 commit. X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:11:42 -0000 On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > So I don't think you are fair enough! > I ever posted a message said that jeff's patch had bug, > the bug is signal lost, but he obviously didn't fixed it, > and you guy allowed him to commit it, please search arch list > about 1:1 thread! I don't think delaying some days of libthr > change to kernel would hurt anything, I had reported > the problem and why did core still allow him to commit? > > David Xu > > > The problem is a minor race where an exiting thread could have a process > wide signal pending when it exits. Hardly a critical issue. Why did we > allow any of kern_thread.c to be commited when it obviously doesn't work > at all? To allow people to try parts of it that did work. Signals worked well enough to allow people to try out teh concept of upcalls and userland scheduling. We got a lot of feedback and learned a lot. kern_thread.c BTW is full of functions that are not generally called AT ALL for non KSE processes. so in effect it is NOT in general use. (the only parts called in normal use are the KSE and KSEG and thread allocators and destructors.) so the risk in having it committed was very small and gained a lot. Enough of this.. I've wasted the first evening I've had free in a month arguing and that's well and truly too much. I'm goign back to sripping out KSEs and I'll pass a patch around when it's done. It will probably (definitly) have some effect on ule so I'm not going to do anything until you've had time to digest it and we can come to some agreement about it. > > Cheers, > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-threads@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-threads-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >