From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 31 22:53:19 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3337816A401 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:53:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11A513C49D for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:53:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0VMTVIN085072; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:29:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org, aanton@spintech.ro Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:54:24 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <45BBEFCB.7090607@spintech.ro> In-Reply-To: <45BBEFCB.7090607@spintech.ro> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200701311654.24688.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:29:44 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/2508/Wed Jan 31 11:42:50 2007 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: Subject: Re: Wait for smp_start X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:53:19 -0000 On Saturday 27 January 2007 19:35, Alin-Adrian Anton wrote: > Hi guys, > > I'm using 6.1. > > I'm trying to make a kernel module sleep and wait for all the > CPUs/cores to be up and running. Is there any elegant way of doing this now? > > As far as I digged I found smp_started variable, but that's kinda > unreliable. I need to be woken up when this is atomically set to 1. > > I'll appreciate any suggestion and your time. Please CC to my address. > > Thanks! Use a SI_SUB_SMP SYSINIT. -- John Baldwin