on 29/03/2010 17:44 John Baldwin said the following: > On Sunday 28 March 2010 7:45:25 am Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >> Peter Jeremy <peterjer...@acm.org> writes: >>> A new kthread which sleeps on channel "update_rtc". When woken, it >>> checks to see if it's within (say) 50msec of a second boundary and so, >>> it does a trylock on the (new) RTC mutex. If it grabs the mutex then >>> it performs the update. If it was too far from the second boundary or >>> it fails to grab the mutex then it sleeps until the next second >>> boundary and tries again. >>> >>> The existing resettodr() would then turn into a wakeup(update_rtc). >> Sounds good to me, but if only that thread has access to the RTC, why >> bother with a mutex? > > I would dispense with the kthread and just use a callout (or have a callout > schedule a task for taskqueue_thread).
Guys, do you think that periodic saving of system clock to hardware and making resettodr asynchronous are dependent issues? Or are they orthogonal and can be implemented independently? -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
