Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 12:10:36 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, sam@FreeBSD.org Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/hwpmc hwpmc_mod.c src/sys/dev/random randomdev_soft.c src/sys/kern kern_intr.c kern_poll.c kern_synch.c kern_thr.c kern_umtx.c sched_4bsd.c subr_taskqueue.c uipc_mqueue.c src/sys/vm vm_zeroidle.c Message-ID: <20060418081036.GU84736@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200604171514.06482.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200604171820.k3HIKcx3068404@repoman.freebsd.org> <200604171514.06482.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 03:14:03PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: J> > Change msleep() and tsleep() to not alter the calling thread's priority J> > if the specified priority is zero. This avoids a race where the calling J> > thread could read a snapshot of it's current priority, then a different J> > thread could change the first thread's priority, then the original thread J> > would call sched_prio() inside msleep() undoing the change made by the J> > second thread. I used a priority of zero as no thread that calls msleep() J> > or tsleep() should be specifying a priority of zero anyway. J> > J> > The various places that passed 'curthread->td_priority' or some variant J> > as the priority now pass 0. J> J> This should fix the problem where the first acpi taskq would run with J> a bogus priority (the sched_prio() when creating the taskqueue seemed J> to be ignored). Sorry for probably lame guess... Is this going to fix the problem with ACPI and new taskqueues? -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060418081036.GU84736>