Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:01:28 -0500 (EST)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
To:        "Richard Seaman, Jr." <dick@tar.com>
Cc:        Kip Macy <kip@lyris.com>, Steffen Merkel <d_f0rce@gmx.de>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Kernel threads
Message-ID:  <Pine.SUN.3.91.991227155441.8874A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <19991227124729.I5975@tar.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 10:30:54AM -0800, Kip Macy wrote:
> > They may be preemptive, but I saw a lot of instances with Lyris where one
> > thread could easily monopolize processor time at the expense of all
> > others and I had to add sleeps in at places.
> 
> Is this recently, or a while ago?  FreeBSD user threads used to use
> SIGVTALRM for its pre-emption signal.  This didn't count time in
> syscalls.  So, if you had a syscall (eg I/O) intensive thread, it
> would hog processor time.  I think that has been changed.

Yes, we use SIGPROF now.

Dan Eischen
eischen@vigrid.com


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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.991227155441.8874A-100000>