Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 14:07:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Scope system threads (was Re: PS_BLOCKED) Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304071354450.3533-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304070730480.9723-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rethinking scope system threads a bit...
Here's what I'd like for scope system threads:
o No separate upcall stack; only ever gets one upcall
after kse_create() is called.
o Still has a thread mailbox in which the lone thread's
signal mask is placed.
o The UTS can deliver signals to scope system threads
with kse_thr_interrupt(&scope_system_thread->tmbx, sig)
or equivalent. Since there is no upcall stack, you
can't make an upcall with kse_mbox->km_sigscaught; you
need to send it a signal just like it was a regular
non-KSE thread.
o Can wait for KSE events from other KSE/KSEGs with
kse_release(&ts). After receiving a wakeup or timing
out, kse_release just returns normally -- no upcall.
Typically, we need to wait for low-level locks or
pthread_cond_[timed]wait().
--
Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10304071354450.3533-100000>