On Sat, 15 Sep 2007, Kip Macy wrote:
Or more likely they'll continue to maintain a sched_yield that isn't
posix compliant. We may just want to add some sort of interface so the
jvm can tell the kernel that sched_yield should be non-compliant for
the current process.
I don't think that is a good idea, it seems like too much of a hack.
The scheduler(s) should schedule threads the way they are designed
to, either obeying a threads priority, using it as a hint, or totally
ignoring it.
If the JVM kept track of the thread priorities in use, I suppose
Thread.yield() could first lower the current thread's priority to
the next used priority and then yield, raising the priority back after
the yield. This isn't perfect, there are race conditions, the next
highest priority thread(s) could be blocked and not runnable, etc.
Maybe just lowering the priority to min or default priority would work
well enough.
This test would fail even on Solaris if you use SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO
since it is POSIX compliant for those scheduling classes.
--
DE
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
