Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 May 2000 03:39:10 -0700
From:      Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
To:        Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>
Cc:        "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Preemptive kernel on older X86 hardware 
Message-ID:  <20000525103910.D802F1CE1@overcee.netplex.com.au>
In-Reply-To: Message from Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>  of "Thu, 25 May 2000 02:44:20 MDT." <200005250844.CAA19436@berserker.bsdi.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Paterson wrote:
> 
> 	The good news is that the actual implementation of the
> mutexs is machine dependent and can change wildly over different
> architectures with no need for the callers to know.
> 
> Chuck

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I'd like to remind folks that we
have an in-kernel linker that can probably help a bit.  We can arrange to
have either the SMP or UP versions of the mutex modules linked in depending
on which type of system it is.  A bit of work would be required to make this
fly, but we have the infrastructure there.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au
"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000525103910.D802F1CE1>