Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:31:18 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, nms@otdel-1.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is there spinlocks/semaphores available for drivers? Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000327142313.16202A@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <200003271901.LAA42391@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Matthew Dillon wrote: > :And would there still be areas of the kernel that disable multiple > :interrupts, perhaps CAM or the network stack for instance? What do > :all the splbio and splnet calls translate into in this new scheme? > : > :-- > :Dan Eischen > > The entire design of the kernel is currently predicated on the spl*() > mechanism. We obviously can't rip it out in a day. I'm guessing it > will probably take two years ... or never if we can eek out sufficient > performance with it still in place. There's a paper that describes how Solaris transitioned from spl()s to mutexes. ISTR they created one mutex for each splxxx. I'll have to find this and re-read it. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.1000327142313.16202A>