Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 09:17:03 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Jonathan Mini <mini@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 11012 for review Message-ID: <3CDBF27F.76C5AE0E@elischer.org> References: <200205081533.g48FX3q20811@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jonathan Mini wrote: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~peter/p4db/chv.cgi?CH=11012 > > Change 11012 by mini@mini_stylus on 2002/05/08 08:32:05 > > - pass thread's instead of proc's to CURSIG() and issignal() > - mark a thread TDS_UNQUEUED when blocking it while its parent > handles its signal (via ptrace(2)). > > This make gdb work properly again, and fixed ptrace(2) on normal > processes. This will probably mean that what we have is capable of almost being committed. You and jhb said that the thread allocator could be rewritten using the new uma mechanisms. if that is done, then we could check in what we have minus some changes that are dependent on comments from others.. (I think DES would like to have a go at the ptrace changes) Is the system stable with only non KSE processes? If we could generate good diffs it would help others to look and comment. julian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CDBF27F.76C5AE0E>