Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 18:52:23 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.dk.tfs.com> To: Michael Petry <petry@netwolf.NetMasters.com> Cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org, louie@wa3ymh.transsys.com Subject: Re: psignal under SMP Message-ID: <3716.851795543@critter.dk.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 28 Dec 1996 11:41:51 EST." <199612281641.LAA28588@netwolf.NetMasters.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199612281641.LAA28588@netwolf.NetMasters.com>, Michael Petry writes >The hard cpu process had its signal posted, but never got >rescheduled to see the signals because it was happy and cozy running on the >second processor. My running of some utilities were enough to force it off >its cpu and cause it to be rescheduled and pickup its signal. yup, known bogon. >It looked to us like psignal.c would have to be made smarter to know not only >if a process is runnable, but also if it is running on another CPU and be >IPI'd. Exactly. Signals are a pain in the butt for MP and heavily pipe-lined/parallel systems, in particular synchronous signals. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | phk@FreeBSD.ORG FreeBSD Core-team. http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk Private mailbox. whois: [PHK] | phk@tfs.com TRW Financial Systems, Inc. Power and ignorance is a disgusting cocktail.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3716.851795543>