From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 5 10:35: 8 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [209.249.129.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A866151DD for ; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:35:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA82111; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:33:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199903051833.KAA82111@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Terry Lambert , dyson@iquest.net, dick@tar.com, jplevyak@inktomi.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lockf and kernel threads In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:23:39 PST." <199903051823.KAA49114@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:33:23 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Two things. > > First, ASTs were a VAXen thing and must be 'simulated' on every other > architecture, including intel. Well, if we adhere to the strict sense of the word you are probably correct. I would say that asynchronous delivery of events mechanism is NOT only a VAX thing. > Second, Intel's ring architecture is 100% *broken*. The only useful > rings are ring 0 and ring 3. That's it. The intermediate rings are no > better then a glorified user mode because most privilaged instructions > cannot be run in them. Thats probably true however for delivery of an AST I don't thing that we need priviliged instructions --- I could be wrong. Amancio To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message