From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 16 17:56:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 357F816A4CE; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:56:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024CC43D31; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:56:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97]) by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C017F7A3D2; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4149D3CE.7020508@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:56:30 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030516 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin References: <200409160537.i8G5bemV019545@repoman.freebsd.org> <200409161036.02801.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200409161036.02801.jhb@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_switch.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 17:56:31 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: >On Thursday 16 September 2004 08:38 am, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > > >>Julian Elischer writes: >> >> >>> Log: >>> e specific code to revert a partial add ot teh run queue, not >>> remrunqueue() which can't handle a partially added thread. >>> >>> >>begyerpar'n? >> >> Somehow I deleted part of the commit message in the act of committing it.. notice that it starts half way through a word.. >The earlier fix to maybe_preempt() would call 'remrunqueue()' to have a thread >that is being preempted to removed from its ksegroup runqueue, however, >remrunqueue() is for removing the thread from all runqueues, and it is >probably not really safe to call that as the thread is not in a full runqueue >state so to speak. Thus, Julian inlined specific code to just remove the >thread from the ksegroup runqueue. I do wonder if that code shouldn't at >least be consolidated into a function that is called by remrunqueue(), >adjustrunqueue(), and maybe_preempt(). Also, the commit message could use a >bit more detail. :) > > >