Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 23:29:15 +0900 From: Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_condvar.c kern_synch.c Message-ID: <200207301430.g6UETF0k040381@silver.carrots.uucp.r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020730092818.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <200207301012.g6UACCNY037208@freefall.freebsd.org> <XFMail.20020730092818.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Added Julian Elischer, the KSEmeister] On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 09:28:18 -0400 (EDT), John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> said: John> On 30-Jul-2002 Seigo Tanimura wrote: >> tanimura 2002/07/30 03:12:11 PDT >> >> Modified files: >> sys/kern kern_condvar.c kern_synch.c >> Log: >> In endtsleep() and cv_timedwait_end(), a thread marked TDF_TIMEOUT may >> be swapped out. Do not put such the thread directly back to the run >> queue. John> Umm, we don't swap out runnable threads do we? I thought we only swapped John> out sleeping threads. Oh, the state is incorrectly set to TDS_SLP in the We used to do so, until KSE milestone 3. Please refer to sys/vm/vm_glue.c rev 1.138. Julian, are we going to swap out a runnable thread, or do we just leave it as we used to do? John> code. *sigh* That is grossly wrong because the thread isn't on a sleep John> queue. TDS_UNQUEUED sounds more suitable. -- Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@r.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> <tanimura@FreeBSD.org> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207301430.g6UETF0k040381>