Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 May 2003 02:35:31 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Subject:   Re: libkse and SMP (was Re: USB bulk read & pthreads)
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305240234060.15741-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <3ECF01BE.BF58609A@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 May 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > This is handy to know; so basically, my expectation from
> > > reading the code around PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM was correct:
> > > a single CPU system with PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS (the default)
> > > can still get itself blocked in the kernel by a single
> > > blocking call (as in the USB bulk read device issue).
> > 
> > If I am reading you correctly, then no.  Scope process
> > threads will block in the kernel, but upcalls will be
> > made to the originating KSE and new threads will be
> > scheduled.
> 
> I'm rereading it, but I don't see that interpretation.
> 
> I guess if both you and Julian both called me on it, I must
> have misexpressed myself, but I currently don't understand
> how.  8-|.

I think it was the part about "a single CPU system with
PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS (the default) can still get itself
blocked in the kernel by a single blocking call" without
mentioning that it won't block other scope process
threads from being run.

-- 
Dan Eischen



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10305240234060.15741-100000>