Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 11:22:32 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS-UP: await/asleep removal imminent Message-ID: <20010117112232.U61852@canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010117105509.jhb@FreeBSD.org>; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:55:09AM -0800 References: <20010117100954.S61852@canonware.com> <XFMail.010117105509.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:55:09AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 17-Jan-01 Jason Evans wrote: > Well, it will be unused if we axe all tsleep's in favor of cv's which does > incur extra overhead, as each cv has to be init'd and destroy'd and carries a > linked list around with it. The extra storage overhead doesn't outweight the > speed increase (from lack of the hash lookup) in all cases I think, so I'm not > sure we want to axe tsleep() just yet. If you axe tsleep() then asleep() can > be emulated by either passing cv's around between functions. I didn't say anything about axing tsleep() right now. That may happen in the future, but not before 5.0. Jason 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?20010117112232.U61852>