From owner-p4-projects Sat May 18 4:40:25 2002 Delivered-To: p4-projects@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 32767) id E3D3537B401; Sat, 18 May 2002 04:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: perforce@freebsd.org Received: from sccrmhc03.attbi.com (sccrmhc03.attbi.com [204.127.202.63]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A215D37B40F; Sat, 18 May 2002 04:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8]) by sccrmhc03.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020518114013.BRPL19355.sccrmhc03.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>; Sat, 18 May 2002 11:40:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA60572; Sat, 18 May 2002 04:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 04:25:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: John Baldwin Cc: Peter Wemm , Perforce Change Reviews , Perforce Change Reviews , Jonathan Mini Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 11120 for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-p4-projects@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 17 May 2002, John Baldwin wrote: > Yes, I think that is the problem. I think it has to do with setting > up/tearing down the thread stacks. If uma could do this w/o holding > the zone locks that would probably be sufficient. The old analogy to this problem was one of the reasons that I used the thread_reap() command an allowed them to be torn down at a known safe time.. (for setting up I actually punted a but by having some spare threads around....) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message