From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Aug 27 20:19:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (c421509-a.pinol1.sfba.home.com [24.7.86.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A47E37B401 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:19:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA76848; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:27:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 20:27:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Trent Nelson Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org, dillon@earth.backplane.com Subject: Re: Paper detailing blocking heuristics based on Scheduler Activiations. In-Reply-To: <20010828110811.C1562@freebsd06.udt> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 thanks for the reference On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Trent Nelson wrote: > > http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/28629.html > > I'd like to hear peoples' opinion on this research paper. It > details a method of using Scheduler Activations to support a new > form of synchronisation primitives. > > How applicable is their work (which was a natural progression from > Anderson, et. al.) to our current situation? Could their suggested > blocking heuristics be incorporated into our kernel threads? > > Matt, I've CC'd you specifically because of your post to -current > that expressed your concern with the current state of locking > primitives in -CURRENT; which got me thinking to post this in the > first place. Julian, well, you get CC'd for obvious reasons. > > Regards, > > Trent. > > -- > Trent Nelson - Software Engineer - nelsont@switch.aust.com > "A man with unlimited enthusiasm can achieve > almost anything." --unknown > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message