Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 09:11:08 +0200 From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, arch@FreeBSD.org Cc: gallatin@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Time sharing for interrupt threads Message-ID: <04f80ff1-2374-8f49-ac13-1c55570cb6c0@selasky.org> In-Reply-To: <ac532f32-97b2-59a1-2cb9-25a083cf7329@FreeBSD.org> References: <ac532f32-97b2-59a1-2cb9-25a083cf7329@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/4/22 23:48, John Baldwin wrote: > My recent changes to the softclock threads (raising their priority) were to > address a livelock issue in which a constant stream of packets could starve > timeout events. Sorry for short-cutting the thread, but why can't we have multiple worker threads with different prio's for timers? In USB we have that, once for Giant locked and non-Giant locked callbacks. I mean, all timer interrupts are executed serially and any congested mutex will make all succeeding timer callbacks halt on that CPU core! --HPS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?04f80ff1-2374-8f49-ac13-1c55570cb6c0>