From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Jun 20 21: 2:30 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (angelica.unixdaemons.com [209.148.64.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E71737B405 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 21:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1]) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.4/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g5L42A14051145; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:02:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: angelica.unixdaemons.com: Host bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1] claimed to be angelica.unixdaemons.com Received: (from bmilekic@localhost) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.4/8.12.1/Submit) id g5L42Ag5051144; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:02:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bmilekic) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:02:10 -0400 From: Bosko Milekic To: Terry Lambert Cc: Gary Thorpe , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: multiple threads for interrupts Message-ID: <20020621000210.A48838@unixdaemons.com> References: <3D1293AE.FDEC441D@mindspring.com> <20020620230514.B38506@unixdaemons.com> <3D12A1CC.988B23D0@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <3D12A1CC.988B23D0@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 08:47:24PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 08:47:24PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: [...] > I do, though, have lots of papers on receiver livelock that I've > posted the references to before. The problem there is that most > people don't read papers. I think that more of the problem is that some people do read papers and, what's more, understand them; however, what these people are actually looking for is not more references to papers, but implementation of the concepts presented in those papers for FreeBSD, proving that those concepts also apply to _our_ system. Certain approaches work well with others, and different approaches may work less well. I'm not claiming that your suggestions are bad, I'm just stating that they shouldn't be taken as being totally correct for us as we cannot adequately evaluate them right now [*]. However, you did initially mention that it would be good to see some sort of evaluation happen, and so perhaps I just misunderstood you and wrongly interpreted you once you started to make claims that seemed to suggest (to me) without a doubt that your solution is THE best one. If that is indeed the case, then I appologize. I maintain the "GEB" is a book worth reading, though. :-) [*] In fact, Chuck just posted in response to this thread and made some very good points regarding performance, and how we may find that the optimal solution is different for different SMP configurations. > -- Terry -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@unixdaemons.com bmilekic@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message