Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:11:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: ithread preemption Message-ID: <15735.47756.501169.199225@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020905160700.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <15735.47204.905352.900631@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <XFMail.20020905160700.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin writes: > Solaris doesn't run on alpha, but it also a bit different in its approach. > I do wonder if there is a way we can violate an assumption in PAL due to > migration though. That is, a thread could return to PAL on a different > CPU than the one the interrupt was originally sent to. This might explain > why only SMP has problems. > Hey ... I think you have it on the nose! That makes the most sense I've heard yet. Do we have any way to bind a thread to a cpu? Drew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15735.47756.501169.199225>