Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 23:31:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Frank Mayhar <frank@exit.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>, smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP meeting summary Message-ID: <200006260631.XAA43949@realtime.exit.com> In-Reply-To: <200006251713.KAA09348@usr02.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Jun 25, 2000 05:13:07 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > In Streams, this was addressed by removing two primitives, and creating > what are called "priority bands" to deal with the issue (I worked for > Novell USG when UnixWare was going to 2.0 and integrating the ES/MP code > into the SVR4 base, and saw much of this happen). Speaking of which, there has _got_ to be a better way. It's possible when dealing with Streams to get into nested-lock situations where you need a lock with a lower priority and it's not possible (due to constraints elsewhere) to raise the priority of the lock. And, of course, it's always dangerous to raise the priority of an existing lock, since you may miss a case. I'm not sure that interrupt threads are the right way to go either, though. If there even _is_ a "right" way. -- Frank Mayhar frank@exit.com http://www.exit.com/ Exit Consulting http://store.exit.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006260631.XAA43949>