From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Aug  6 17:45:55 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 65DB037B401; Wed,  6 Aug 2003 17:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B398E43F85; Wed,  6 Aug 2003 17:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from interjet.elischer.org ([12.233.125.100])
          by attbi.com (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP
          id <2003080700455301300i0530e>; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 00:45:53 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA08114;
	Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:45:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
In-Reply-To: <20030806220421.GA1404@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0308061745250.4704-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: deischen@freebsd.org
cc: threads@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: KSE/ia64: a quick update
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 00:45:55 -0000



On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:42:45PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > 
> > Originally we would not do an upcall unless the
> > kernel was neterred from a syscall, however David added soem code so
> > that at a clock interrupt, if the mailbox indicates that it has had
> > enough time, An UPCALL context is belatedly made and saved and an upcall
> > results..
> 
> Ah, so I have David to thank for the added complexity... :-)

not really.. we all discussed it..