Here's the basic problem: The kernel is currently designed for
single-threaded operation plus interrupt handling. A piece of code
in the kernel can temporarily disable certain interrupts with the
spl*() codes to cover situations where a race on some system resource
might
Here's the basic problem: The kernel is currently designed for
single-threaded operation plus interrupt handling. A piece of code
in the kernel can temporarily disable certain interrupts with the
spl*() codes to cover situations where a race on some system resource
might
In message 199906270733.aaa10...@apollo.backplane.com Matthew Dillon writes:
: Here's the basic problem: The kernel is currently designed for
: single-threaded operation plus interrupt handling. A piece of code
: in the kernel can temporarily disable certain interrupts with the
:
On 26-Jun-99 Jesus Monroy wrote:
An approach like that can't possibly be sufficient if code has been
written with the assumption that only interrupt-like events or
blocking calls can change things from under it. There is quite a bit
of code in FreeBSD that relies on this.
Can you
On 26-Jun-99 Jesus Monroy wrote:
The part I'm lost on is "can change things from under it".
From under what? I assume the statement means "it" as being
the code or driver. So the question begs, what things can
change?
The assumption that changes is that your code
On 26-Jun-99 Jesus Monroy wrote:
An approach like that can't possibly be sufficient if code has been
written with the assumption that only interrupt-like events or
blocking calls can change things from under it. There is quite a bit
of code in FreeBSD that relies on this.
Can you
Daniel J. O'Connor dar...@dons.net.au wrote:
On 26-Jun-99 Jesus Monroy wrote:
An approach like that can't possibly be sufficient if code has been
written with the assumption that only interrupt-like events or
blocking calls can change things from under it. There is quite
a bit of
On 26-Jun-99 Jesus Monroy wrote:
The part I'm lost on is can change things from under it.
From under what? I assume the statement means it as being
the code or driver. So the question begs, what things can
change?
The assumption that changes is that your code assumes
Jesus Monroy wrote:
Ville-Pertti Keinonen w...@iki.fi wrote:
m...@servo.ccr.org (Mike O'Dell) writes:
we published the best Unix SMP paper I've ever seen in Computing
Systems - from the Amdahl guys who did an SMP version of the kernel
by very clever hacks on SPLx() macros to make
Ville-Pertti Keinonen w...@iki.fi wrote:
m...@servo.ccr.org (Mike O'Dell) writes:
we published the best Unix SMP paper I've ever seen in Computing
Systems - from the Amdahl guys who did an SMP version of the kernel
by very clever hacks on SPLx() macros to make them spin locks and
a bit of
10 matches
Mail list logo
