Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 28 Sep 2001 06:55:53 -0500
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>
To:        Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
Cc:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: KSE next steps...
Message-ID:  <20010928065553.D59854@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010928074716.29490A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>; from eischen@vigrid.com on Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 07:53:39AM -0400
References:  <20010928040113.B59854@elvis.mu.org> <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010928074716.29490A-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> [010928 06:54] wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > * Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> [010928 02:44] wrote:
> > > 
> > > int abort_thread(struct kt_context *ktc); /* if we find a thread in */ 
> > > 				/* this process that has this ktc, */
> > > 				/* then if it is sleeping, abort the syscall */
> > > 				/* if it is running, let it continue but set */
> > > 				/* flag so that if it tries to sleep, it aborts */
> > > 				/* instead */
> > 
> > Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this will not be possible without
> > a tremendous amount of work, a variation that may work is allowing
> > the syscall to run to completion, returning the error code and then
> > aborting it.  Too much code would have to change if tsleep became
> > a cancellation point.
> 
> Think of this as kill() on a process; it shouldn't be too different.
> If PCATCH is specified in the tsleep, then it is terminated immediately,
> otherwise it just remains pending until (and if) it is checked at a
> later point in time.  Regardless of whether PCATCH is specified, the
> thread never returns to userland.  The UTS is notified through an
> upcall in the same way that it would be if a thread blocked (but with
> a different completion status).

This is quite different from winking out of existance when it tries
to sleep. :)

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'

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?20010928065553.D59854>