Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 14:16:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Preemptive kernel on older X86 hardware Message-ID: <14636.7064.775632.285834@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <200005241800.MAA07427@berserker.bsdi.com> References: <200005241800.MAA07427@berserker.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Paterson writes: > } > }If this isn't possible on an x86, please don't laugh too hard. I > }really don't know much about low-level x86 details. > } > }Cheers, > } > }Drew > > It can be done. In BSD/OS and Solaris however the locks must > be gotten because they are what protect from interrupt service. > Err... But I wasn't advocating removing the locks. I was suggesting having the routine patch in the correct locking code (or calls thereto) based on the processor type at the first invocation of each mutex. This way we could have a GENERIC kernel with the correct locking code for both 3/486 and modern x86 processors compiled in without the overhead of doing the processor type check on every call. Sorry if I wasn't clear.. Drew ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin Duke University Email: gallatin@cs.duke.edu Department of Computer Science Phone: (919) 660-6590 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14636.7064.775632.285834>