Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:34:30 +0300
From:      Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r211176 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 i386/i386
Message-ID:  <20100811123430.GK2396@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikk3m-=5W7TVV5C-XM4AnwS1LuAi7GGEeP0B9dV@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201008111051.o7BApRp4028538@svn.freebsd.org> <20100811105739.GJ2396@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <AANLkTikk3m-=5W7TVV5C-XM4AnwS1LuAi7GGEeP0B9dV@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--STPqjqpCrtky8aYs
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 01:21:46PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote:
> 2010/8/11 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>:
> > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:51:27AM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote:
> >> Author: attilio
> >> Date: Wed Aug 11 10:51:27 2010
> >> New Revision: 211176
> >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/211176
> >>
> >> Log:
> >> =9A IPI handlers may run generally with interrupts disabled because th=
ey
> >> =9A are served via an interrupt gate.
> >>
> >> =9A However, that doesn't explicitly prevent preemption and thread
> >> =9A migration thus scheduler pinning may be necessary in some handlers.
> >> =9A Fix that.
> >
> > How the preemption is supposed to happen ? Aside from the explicit
> > calls to mi_switch() from e.g. critical_exit().
>=20
> IIRC it should be hardclock() willing to schedule the softclock(). It
> is the critical_exit() in the thread_unlock() that may trigger it
> (sorry for not digging more, it was a while back that I hacked this
> part, but I guess you can verify on your own).
> We already have other points within the kernel that take care of
> dealing with preemption/migration like lapic_handle_timer(), for
> example.

Right, and if the interrupts are indeed disabled, I do not see how
the preemption may be triggered in the fragments like
	cpu =3D PCPU_GET(cpuid);
	cpumask =3D PCPU_GET(cpumask);

--STPqjqpCrtky8aYs
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkximNYACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4hokwCfVKvpntMv62suh6fSzcoc3jfY
Q9sAoJiLrEVzHRQAc/enXp5bNnNPGlnK
=OPog
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--STPqjqpCrtky8aYs--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100811123430.GK2396>