Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:05:20 -0400 (EDT) From: "Andrew R. Reiter" <arr@watson.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: some small patches Message-ID: <20030417200446.N54973@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304171618370.55166-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304171618370.55166-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 17 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: : :Here are two small patches they are pretty non-controversial in my :opinion. : :they are part of a bigger patch, but I'd like to get them in separatly :to simplify the bigger one. :the first patch: :http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/IDLETD.diff :moves the flag that identifies a thread as being one of the idle threads :from the KSE to the thread. The code that wants to know already :has a thread pointer, but not the KSE pointer so this makes more sense. Is this correct? Index: sys/proc.h =================================================================== RCS file: /repos/projects/mirrored/freebsd/src/sys/sys/proc.h,v retrieving revision 1.313 diff -u -r1.313 proc.h --- sys/proc.h 2003/04/13 21:29:11 1.313 +++ sys/proc.h 2003/04/17 22:52:07 @@ -349,6 +323,7 @@ #define TDF_CAN_UNBIND 0x000004 /* Only temporarily bound. */ #define TDF_SINTR 0x000008 /* Sleep is interruptible. */ #define TDF_TIMEOUT 0x000010 /* Timing out during sleep. */ +#define TDF_IDLETD 0x000040 /* This is an idle thread */ #define TDF_SELECT 0x000040 /* Selecting; wakeup/waiting danger. */ #define TDF_CVWAITQ 0x000080 /* Thread is on a cv_waitq (not slpq). */ #define TDF_UPCALLING 0x000100 /* This thread is doing an upcall. */ Both TDF_IDLETD and TD_SELECT have the same value. Just curious. Cheers, Andrew : : :The second patch: :http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/sched_clock.diff :makes the sched_ API entrypoint sched_clock() :take a thread argument instead of a KSE. :Once again, the callers have the thread pointer and not the KSE pointer, :and in fact they probably should not have the KSE pointer. : : :anyone object to these patches? : : :_______________________________________________ :freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list :http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current :To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" : -- Andrew R. Reiter arr@watson.org arr@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030417200446.N54973>