Ted Unangst wrote: > > Does 0xffff come from ACPI? Can we give that a name? > > I thought sleeping for one tick is kinda weird, but I see what it's doing with > the acpi_dotask loop. This feels precarious, but whatever.
So upon further thought, this is pretty bad. If the new task also calls sem wait, we'll end up back here, recursing on the event loop. And of course, the first sem can't wakeup until after the second one does. If you want to say it was like this when you got here, ok, but pretending to pause like this is troublesome. There was a bug in libc rpc code where it tried to do something similar and blew up the stack.
