Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 10:36:02 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_switch.c Message-ID: <200409161036.02801.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <xzpmzzqpewe.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <200409160537.i8G5bemV019545@repoman.freebsd.org> <xzpmzzqpewe.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 16 September 2004 08:38 am, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Julian Elischer <julian@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > Log: > > e specific code to revert a partial add ot teh run queue, not > > remrunqueue() which can't handle a partially added thread. > > begyerpar'n? The earlier fix to maybe_preempt() would call 'remrunqueue()' to have a thr= ead=20 that is being preempted to removed from its ksegroup runqueue, however,=20 remrunqueue() is for removing the thread from all runqueues, and it is=20 probably not really safe to call that as the thread is not in a full runque= ue=20 state so to speak. Thus, Julian inlined specific code to just remove the=20 thread from the ksegroup runqueue. I do wonder if that code shouldn't at=20 least be consolidated into a function that is called by remrunqueue(),=20 adjustrunqueue(), and maybe_preempt(). Also, the commit message could use = a=20 bit more detail. :) =2D-=20 John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" =3D http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200409161036.02801.jhb>