Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:52:22 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_exit.c kern_thread.c
Message-ID:  <200603150852.23540.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200603150730.36818.davidxu@freebsd.org>
References:  <200603140400.k2E40LiR095530@repoman.freebsd.org> <200603140825.40761.jhb@freebsd.org> <200603150730.36818.davidxu@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 06:30 pm, David Xu wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 March 2006 21:25, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Monday 13 March 2006 11:00 pm, David Xu wrote:
> > > davidxu     2006-03-14 04:00:21 UTC
> > >
> > >   FreeBSD src repository
> > >
> > >   Modified files:
> > >     sys/kern             kern_exit.c kern_thread.c
> > >   Log:
> > >   1. Count last time slice, this intends to fix
> > >      "calcru: runtime went backwards" bug for threaded process.
> > >   2. Add comment about possible logical problem with scheduler.
> > >
> > >   MFC after: 3 days
> >
> > Great!  Thanks for testing this!
>
> I was very upset, and forgot to put your name in the log, apologize.
> Note that because the thread has detached itself from scheduler,
> calling PROC_UNLOCK in theory is not safe, so I have moved
> up this patch code a bit.

Ok.  I think the PROC_UNLOCK might be ok in practice though because
we are in a critical section, so we won't preempt when we unlock
the mutex and will keep executing until we get to the cpu_throw.

=2D-=20
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> =A0<>< =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" =A0=3D =A0http://www.FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200603150852.23540.jhb>