From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 27 07:47:25 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 A832516A4CF; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3982943D41; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.10/8.12.1) with ESMTP id i3RElLQk025312;
	Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:47:21 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:47:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200404270947.08523.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10404271041260.22187-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: threads@FreeBSD.org
cc: David Xu <davidxu@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: kse_release and kse_wakeup problem (fwd)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:47:25 -0000

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, John Baldwin wrote:

> On Monday 26 April 2004 01:38 pm, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm experimenting with adding an wakeup_thread() to kern_thread.c
> > > (to complement wakeup() and wakeup_one()).  If we shouldn't be
> > > using sleepq's directly, the thread code either needs to
> > >
> > >   a) queue msleep()'ing upcalls/threads itself having them
> > >      all block on on their own unique wchan's; or
> > >
> > >   b) use a wakeup_thread() that wakes up a specific thread.
> >
> > Sorry, patch for b) is at:
> >
> > 	http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs
> 
> Erm, does sleepq_signal_thread() do anything different than sleepq_remove() 
> (removes a thread from a specified wait channel if and only if the thread is 
> sleeping on that wait channel)?

I guess not.  I thought we would have to search the list of threads
to ensure it was queued.  I've updated the patch slightly -- added
thread_upcall_check() and changed where the new thread flags are
stored:

	http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/sys.diffs

If I remove sleepq_signal_thread() and use sleepq_remove() instead,
does the patch look OK to you?

Thanks,

-- 
Dan Eischen