Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 12:13:41 -0500 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@freebsd.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@spinner.dialix.com> Cc: cr@jcmax.com (Cyrus Rahman), smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Questions about mp_lock Message-ID: <12968.860260421@orion.webspan.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 06 Apr 1997 01:04:44 %2B0800." <199704051704.BAA18422@spinner.DIALix.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote in message ID <199704051704.BAA18422@spinner.DIALix.COM>: > Moving the kernel locking up a layer and having a seperate entry/exit lock > in the trap/syscall/interupt area would be a major win without too much > cost. What we'd gain by that would be that we could then gradually move > to a per-subsystem locking system perhaps based initially on which syscall > or trap type. It'd be quite possible to have one cpu in the kernel doing > IP checksumming on a packet, another in the vfs system somewhere, another > doing some copy-on-write page copies in the vm system and so on. Things > like getpid() would need no locking whatsoever. But that's for later once > the basics are working. Question if you would: define`basics'? Thanks, Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?12968.860260421>