From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 10 16:47:33 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67F137B401; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.chesapeake.net (chesapeake.net [205.130.220.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85EA143FBF; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net) Received: from localhost (jroberson@localhost) by mail.chesapeake.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ANlQJ15436; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:47:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jroberson@chesapeake.net) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:47:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Jeff Roberson To: Daniel Eischen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030410194605.A37530-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: KSE signals (was RE: cvs commit: src/sys/ddb db_ps.csrc/sys/i386/i386 genassym.c) X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 23:47:34 -0000 On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is NO support for locking a KSE to a CPU yet. That is a completely > > > > > > different question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is in ULE. > > > > > > > > But you keep your own information on this.. > > > > > > Yes, I'm telling you, if you add anything make it specific to the > > > scheduler. It doesn't not need to be in scheduler independant code. We > > > just need a new system call for binding a kse to a cpu. This will be > > > scheduler independant and then we can call a scheduler dependant routine > > > like sched_bind(kse, cpu); > > > > exactly my thought. > > This is all good stuff, but can we fix KSE signals first please? > Pretty please??? I agree. I offered to implement the required kernel bits once someone explains exactly what needs to happen. I think there is more broken than td_sigmask. I need to sign up for the threads mailing list.. Cheers, Jeff