From owner-freebsd-current Fri Dec 21 5:51:22 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from iguana.aciri.org (iguana.aciri.org [192.150.187.36]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866CC37B419; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:51:20 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by iguana.aciri.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id fBLDpHo15390; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:51:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:51:17 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Bruce Evans Cc: John Baldwin , Peter Wemm , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vm_zeropage priority problems. Message-ID: <20011221055117.A15321@iguana.aciri.org> References: <20011222003639.B4708-100000@gamplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20011222003639.B4708-100000@gamplex.bde.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 12:46:40AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > I think pri_native is just an implementation detail which shouldn't > be used or visible to threads. It used used by the priority propagation > mechanism to hold the original pri_level. Threads should just use their > original priority (or a different one if they want to temporarily change > thier priority). Even pri_level probably shouldn't be used or visible > to threads. the original priority should be somewhere and accessible, either directly or through some function. Otherwise how do we know what to pass to tsleep() ? In any case I wonder if this is a bug new in -current; -stable uses three separate data structures for realtime, user and idle tasks so even specifying the wrong priority in tsleep should not cause crossing classes there. -current has only one array, hence the chance of doing the wrong thing. cheers luigi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message