Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 16:00:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> Cc: marcel@xcllnt.net Subject: Re: KSD/TSD take 2 (was: KSE critical regions) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0307241540460.69488-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <002501c35230$1205be60$0701a8c0@tiger>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, David Xu wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julian Elischer" <julian@elischer.org>
> To: <deischen@freebsd.org>
> Cc: <threads@freebsd.org>; "David Xu" <davidxu@freebsd.org>; <marcel@xcllnt.net>
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 4:59 AM
> Subject: Re: KSD/TSD take 2 (was: KSE critical regions)
> to the kernel.
> >
>
> userland can always adapt the layout by:
>
> struct lib_kse_mailbox {
> void *TLS_tcb;
> struct kse_mailbox kmbx;
> };
>
> and set base address to lib_kse_mailbox, userland can
> do whatever it wants to do. same thing can be done for
> thread mailbox.
>
> I don't think too many fields not related to interaction
> between kernel and userland should be pushed into mailbox,
> it is too ugly.
I agree.. as long as we state very strongly that the segment register
points to the TCB and NOT the mailbox, and that the mailbox may not be
the first item in the TCB, then it works ok..
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0307241540460.69488-100000>