Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 17:02:42 +0900 From: Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: preemption across processors Message-ID: <200205290802.g4T82g3i058559@rina.r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <200205290713.g4T7DD3i043889@rina.r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> References: <200205280810.g4S8Ah3i071756@rina.r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> <XFMail.20020528145604.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <200205290713.g4T7DD3i043889@rina.r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 May 2002 16:13:13 +0900, Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> said: tanimura> Maybe we can solve both of the issues above by roughly checking if a tanimura> thread can keep spinning without acquiring any locks, in the similar tanimura> way as we do for a spin mutex. First, test the following conditions: tanimura> - The owner of the mutex has not changed. tanimura> - The owner is on a processor. - The priority of the curent thread has not changed. If some other thread spins for a mutex held by the current thread, we may have to propagate the priority of the other thread. -- Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> <tanimura@FreeBSD.org> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200205290802.g4T82g3i058559>