Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:55:25 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: John Birrell <jb@freebsd.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 100025 for review Message-ID: <200606260955.25591.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200606260537.k5Q5bOgw020000@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200606260537.k5Q5bOgw020000@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 26 June 2006 01:37, John Birrell wrote: > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=100025 > > Change 100025 by jb@jb_freebsd2 on 2006/06/26 05:37:23 > > The use of FreeBSD's semaphores here creates scheduler instability. > This device needs a clean path from the timer interrupt. > > For the time being, since I'm only working on single processor > systems, comment out the semaphore calls. When I get access to a > multi-cpu machine, I'll need to implement a simple semaphore system > for use here. The only thing you can use from the timer interrupt is a spin mutex as far as synchronization primitives. Note that you can provide sleep/wakeup via msleep_spin() and wakeup() + wakeup_one(). -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200606260955.25591.jhb>