Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:12:02 -0800 (PST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, smp@FreeBSD.org, archie@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: looking for locking advice.. Message-ID: <XFMail.001221111202.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20001221105710.U19572@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21-Dec-00 Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> [001221 10:47] wrote: >> >> On 21-Dec-00 Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> > I wouldn't worry all too much about the distiction between interrupt >> > execution state versus non-interrupt. Sure device nodes want to complete >> > as soon as possible, however eventually we'll have _multiple_ software >> > interrupt threads running on each processor so latency is reduced. >> >> > ps ax | grep 'swi[0-9]' | wc -l >> 7 >> >> We already have multiple software interrupt threads that can run >> concurrently. >> :) > > But not in the same class though, right? > > You can't more than one network software inetrrupt running atm, no? You could if you wanted. Just create multiple threads via sinthand_add() and schedule them with sched_swi(). (Yes, this is another namespace I'm going to fix0r). -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ 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?XFMail.001221111202.jhb>