Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 07:54:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: cc@137.org, julian@whistle.com Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rfork patch, please comment Message-ID: <199910291154.HAA10817@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer wrote: > yes that's the one.. > it's easier to understand when you have the diagrams and he's here > explaining them.. > > On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Chris Csanady wrote: > [...] > > Were you reffering to the use of async call gates, in conjunction with a > > user space call conversion scheduler? Can you put the diagrams up for others to see? I really think the "Scheduler Activations" paper is worth a read if you haven't already. It's available at acm.org, but reading the fine print, I think I can put it on freefall as long as it's not for direct commercial advantage. You can grab it from: http://www.freebsd.org/~deischen/p95-anderson.pdf The async call gates and user space call conversion scheduler sounds similar to scheduler activations, but I think the difference is that for async call gates, the kernel creates an kernel thread to assist a potentially blocking system call, whereas scheduler activations perform a context switch when a thread blocks in the kernel. I guess both methods would notify the user-level threads library of the event. Did I get that right? Dan Eischen eischen@vigrid.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199910291154.HAA10817>