From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 30 15:21:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 097C437B401 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6F143FD7 for ; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:21:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h5UMLtAI021763; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 18:21:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 18:21:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com To: David Xu In-Reply-To: <002501c33f55$1ed32530$0701a8c0@tiger> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rtprio and kse X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: deischen@freebsd.org List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:21:57 -0000 On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, David Xu wrote: > From: "Daniel Eischen" > > > > Obviously you're expectations are not correct :-) Aside from > > breaking POSIX (a scope process thread being silently converted > > to a scope system thread), rtprio() is a system call and > > affects the kernel priority. > > > > rtprio means he want to exclusively use CPU, not only between > threads in process but also between threads in system, I can > not image a guy is stilling using PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS but not > PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM to define a competition scope in process > but not system wide, if he want to be rtprio in a process but > not system scope, I think he'd use pthread_setprio(), otherwise > setting thread to PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM is necessary. It is legitimate to want a single (or set) of threads to have real-time priority and not the others. Since the priority is in the KSEG, this is possible to do without fork()ing. -- Dan Eischen