Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread John Baldwin
On Monday 03 November 2008 11:27:13 am Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Monday 03 November 2008 11:08 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > > Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > > >> Author: mav > > >> Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > > >> New Revision: 184558 > > >

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread John Baldwin
On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50:16 am Alexander Motin wrote: > Author: mav > Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > New Revision: 184558 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 > > Log: > As soon as we have several threads per process now, it is not correct to > use process ID as ACPI t

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Alexander Motin
Jung-uk Kim wrote: I'm also sorry, but that is what I see: typedef __int32_t __lwpid_t; /* Thread ID (a.k.a. LWP) */ ... td->td_tid = alloc_unr(tid_unrhdr); ... tid_unrhdr = new_unrhdr(PID_MAX + 2, INT_MAX, &tid_lock); So what have I missed, where is the problem? Why td_tid is not uni

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Jung-uk Kim
On Monday 03 November 2008 12:26 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On top of that: > > /* Returning 0 is not allowed. */ > return (curthread->td_tid + 1); > > may actually return 0 because it can be INT_MAX. :-) Sorry, it was just my stupidity. I meant td_tid itself cannot be 0, so + 1 should be

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Jung-uk Kim
On Monday 03 November 2008 11:08 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > >> Author: mav > >> Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > >> New Revision: 184558 > >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 > >> > >> Log: > >>

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Alexander Motin
Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: >> Author: mav >> Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 >> New Revision: 184558 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 >> >> Log: >> As soon as we have several threads per process now, it is not >> correct to

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Jung-uk Kim
On Monday 03 November 2008 11:08 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > >> Author: mav > >> Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > >> New Revision: 184558 > >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 > >> > >> Log: > >>

Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-03 Thread Jung-uk Kim
On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > Author: mav > Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > New Revision: 184558 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 > > Log: > As soon as we have several threads per process now, it is not > correct to use process ID as ACPI thread

svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd

2008-11-02 Thread Alexander Motin
Author: mav Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 New Revision: 184558 URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 Log: As soon as we have several threads per process now, it is not correct to use process ID as ACPI thread ID. Concurrent requests with equal thread IDs broke ACPI mutexes opera