From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 15 19:45:21 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD8DA16A588 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:45:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail4.speakeasy.net (mail4.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.204]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 451C943D46 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:45:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 13980 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2004 19:45:21 -0000 Received: from dsl027-160-063.atl1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) encrypted SMTP for ; 15 Nov 2004 19:45:20 -0000 Received: from [10.50.41.235] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAFJj0s8076045; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:45:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Anurekh Saxena Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:33:57 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200411151433.57236.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on server.baldwin.cx cc: Robert Watson Subject: Re: kernel: return from interrupt X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:45:21 -0000 On Thursday 11 November 2004 10:59 pm, Anurekh Saxena wrote: > > > > Even normal "options PREEMPTION" should do this. I know from tracing > > > > the kernel in 6.x that that's the way the system behaves out of the > > > > box; with PREEMPTION turned on in 5.x you should see the same > > > > behavior. One thing I often do see, FWIW, is that if you're on an > > > > SMP box, the ithread will get scheduled to run immediately on another > > > > CPU that's idle, so you won't actually preempt the thread on the > > > > current CPU other than for the interrupt handler. What behavior are > > > > you seeing that suggests this isn't happening with PREEMPTION > > > > compiled in? > > > > > > I may be missing something fundamental here, but, doreti (exceptions.s) > > > does not call 'ast' for an interrupted task, that does not have RPL of > > > 3 (user). So, even if an interrupt is pending, and the 'NEEDRESCHED' > > > is set, the scheduling decision is delayed till the kernel thread or > > > whatever was running in the kernel sleeps, or give up the cpu(call > > > mi_switch), or returns to user mode. > > > > > > AFAIK this is the only return path from an interrupt. Unless there is > > > another return path for the interrupts, the scheduler is not invoked on > > > a return. > > > > Assuming we're talking about i386, lapic_handle_intr() will call > > intr_execute_handlers(), which will walk the list of handlers for the > > interrupt, and either directly invoke the fast handlers of the > > interrupts, or call ithread_schedule() to schedule the ithread. > > ithread_schedule() will invoke setrunqueue(), which enters the scheduler > > and is a preemption point. If you dig down a bit, you'll find a call to > > maybe_preempt(), which may preempt if appropriate, resulting in a call to > > mi_switch() to the ithread. The maybe_preempt() code will only kick in > > to actually switch if PREEMPTION is defined. > > Yeah, I got it wrong. Without the FULL_PREEMPTION enabled, it does not > preempt unless the current thread is in the idle priority band. > I was expecting the NEEDRESCHED flag to be used for preemption on > return paths, especially for interrupt context. I think this method > works better since preemption points become well defined in the > kernel. > Thanks for helping me figure this out. NEEDRESCHED (albeit rather broken at the moment) is used to implement preemptino of user threads. As Robert mentioned above, in-kernel preemption is managed via either direct switches in setrunqueue() or deferred preemptions via TDF_OWEPREEMPT in critical_exit(). -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org