Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 16:31:05 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Cc: freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: ithread preemption Message-ID: <XFMail.20020905163105.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <15735.47756.501169.199225@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05-Sep-2002 Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > 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? I used to. Then KSE3 was committed. I suppose I could rewrite it from scratch again. > Drew -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ 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?XFMail.20020905163105.jhb>