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 ID.
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 use process ID
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
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
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
URL:
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 thread
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
