Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 16:47:39 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@iquest.net> To: julian@whistle.com (Julian Elischer) Cc: smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call to arms..-SMP Message-ID: <199906182147.QAA00721@dyson.iquest.net.> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990618112103.9498B-100000@current1.whistle.com> from Julian Elischer at "Jun 18, 1999 11:44:21 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer said: > > They define a thread for each interrupt source (e.g. irq6,irg7, etc.) > > When the interrupt occurs they save regs and transfer to the stack > associated with that thread. However all extra thread context > switching is delayed (in the hope that it wont have to be done). > If a lock is encountered, the rest of the context switch is done, and the > thread sleeps. (and control is passed back to the holder of the lock (if > they are runnable) or the original process. > > Lazy evaluation of the interrupt thread context switch.. very cunning.. > Maybe something BDE could look at.. he's definitly the most qualified for > that stuff. > > spls go away entirely after locks are ubiquitous. > Wow, that is *exactly* the approach in the typical realtime kernel. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@iquest.net | it makes one look stupid jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906182147.QAA00721>