hi,
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 08:14:50PM -0700, Erik Fair wrote:
> [..]
>
>> Until something is written and committed, I suggest an easy change in
>> timecounter
>> "quality" for HPET to make it preferred to TSC if both are present.
>
> It took me also a little while to recognize that i have a
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 08:14:50PM -0700, Erik Fair wrote:
[..]
> Until something is written and committed, I suggest an easy change in
> timecounter
> "quality" for HPET to make it preferred to TSC if both are present.
It took me also a little while to recognize that i have a timecounter issue.
YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> the current bahaviour would benefit applications which use i386 %gs register
> for their own purposes. is it your concern?
Note I did not propose to alter the default behavior. I just want an
option to disable it.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@n
hi,
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 07:31:59PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>
>> > I maintain that trying to move contexts between threads is an inherently
>> > bad idea and that it is a very inefficient interface for implementing
>> > coroutines. I object to this chang
NetBSD has a problem with NTP time keeping on x86 systems which have TSC: if
those systems have variable CPU clock frequency support for power consumption
efficiency (e.g. SpeedStep, PowerNow), if or when the CPU frequency changes,
the relationship between TSC and the ticking of real time change
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> Or libpthread or rtld for the same kind of issue.
I could understand libpthread would get confused if pthread_self() did
not match struct lwp's l_lid, and this is just the problem I want to
address by having _UC_TLSBASE on all ports. If you have the flag, you
can disa
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 07:27:36PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> rJoerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
> > You are mixing up two unrelated items. The thread private area and the
> > thread ID are not the same thing. Your "fix" only affects the former,
> > not the latter.
>
> Right, I was not sure what
rJoerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> You are mixing up two unrelated items. The thread private area and the
> thread ID are not the same thing. Your "fix" only affects the former,
> not the latter.
Right, I was not sure what you were talking about. You mean struct lwp's
l_lid, right? If this is the case
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 04:21:55PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> You can mount them by name. I have (on my non-GPT root disk):
>
> NAME=sb2k5Root/a/ ffs rw,log 1 1
> NAME=sb2k5Root/bnoneswapsw,dp0 0
>
> in /etc/fstab. With gpt you can labe
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 06:19:02PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
> > No, it doesn't. You don't change the lwpid if you move to a different
> > kernel thread. As such, you are breaking the "lwpid is constant"
> > property.
>
> This is how NetBSD currently behave, un
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> No, it doesn't. You don't change the lwpid if you move to a different
> kernel thread. As such, you are breaking the "lwpid is constant"
> property.
This is how NetBSD currently behave, unless the user takes care of
unsetting _UC_TLSBASE before walling swapcontext().
Hi
Attached is an updated patch for _UC_TLSBASE, with some documentation.
I need help to validate the MD parts, especially for PowerPC.
While we are there, it seems we could remove _UC_ARM_VFP (unused),
and perhaps it would make sense to support _UC_SETSTACK and _UC_CLRSTACK
on ports where it i
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> They are still very heavy for coroutine usage.
I cannot argue on that point. This is where it would be interesting if
you could defend that on gluster-de...@nongnu.org.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 03:00:50AM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>
> > > Therefore I do not understand why you oppose the proposal of proposing a
> > > MI interface to let the user opt out of that bad behavior.
> >
> > Your "fix" doesn't change this issue at all.
>
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > Therefore I do not understand why you oppose the proposal of proposing a
> > MI interface to let the user opt out of that bad behavior.
>
> Your "fix" doesn't change this issue at all.
Of course it does.
For now if you want to swapcontext() between threads, you c
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 10:02:48AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> - however, we should bring back (under slightly different names, and in libc)
>the old pure userland setcontext (and friends) that we used to have
>in the N:M libpthread. We have the code for all archs, it is tested, and
>
So, I see various things coming together in this thread, and I would
suggest to fix them all with a change beyound what Emmanuel originaly
proposed:
- the pthread_self() usage and the binding to a register is a property of
our libpthread implementation, so it should overwrite setcontext and
17 matches
Mail list logo
