Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:11:56 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   RE: ithread preemption
Message-ID:  <15735.47756.501169.199225@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020905160700.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <15735.47204.905352.900631@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <XFMail.20020905160700.jhb@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

John Baldwin writes:
 > Solaris doesn't run on alpha, but it also a bit different in its approach.
 > I do wonder if there is a way we can violate an assumption in PAL due to
 > migration though.  That is, a thread could return to PAL on a different
 > CPU than the one the interrupt was originally sent to.  This might explain
 > why only SMP has problems.
 > 

Hey ... I think you have it on the nose!   That makes the most sense
I've heard yet.

Do we have any way to bind a thread to a cpu?

Drew

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15735.47756.501169.199225>