Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 18 Jun 1999 16:47:39 -0500 (EST)
From:      "John S. Dyson" <dyson@iquest.net>
To:        julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer)
Cc:        smp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Call to arms..-SMP
Message-ID:  <199906182147.QAA00721@dyson.iquest.net.>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990618112103.9498B-100000@current1.whistle.com> from Julian Elischer at "Jun 18, 1999 11:44:21 am"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer said:
> 
> They define a thread for each interrupt source (e.g. irq6,irg7, etc.)
> 
> When the interrupt occurs they save regs and transfer to the stack
> associated with that thread. However all extra thread context
> switching is delayed (in the hope that it wont have to be done).
> If a lock is encountered, the rest of the context switch is done, and the
> thread sleeps. (and control is passed back to the holder of the lock (if
> they are runnable) or the original process.
> 
> Lazy evaluation of the interrupt thread context switch.. very cunning.. 
> Maybe something BDE could look at.. he's definitly the most qualified for
> that stuff. 
> 
> spls go away entirely after locks are ubiquitous.
> 
Wow, that is *exactly* the approach in the typical realtime kernel.

-- 
John                  | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
dyson@iquest.net      | it makes one look stupid
jdyson@nc.com         | and it irritates the pig.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906182147.QAA00721>