Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:14:14 +0000
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Alex Wilkinson <alex.wilkinson@dsto.defence.gov.au>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: taskqueue patch
Message-ID:  <1068542054.24997.2.camel@herring.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <20031110233914.GC14579@squirm.dsto.defence.gov.au>
References:  <20031110051010.GC33733@elvis.mu.org> <1068454923.21784.1.camel@herring.nlsystems.com> <20031110233914.GC14579@squirm.dsto.defence.gov.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 23:39, Alex Wilkinson wrote:
> 	On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:02:03AM +0000, Doug Rabson wrote:
> 
> 	I wasn't involved in converting taskqueue from 4.x-style SWIs to kernel
> 	threads so I can't be sure but this does look reasonable. I've been
> 	wondering about the 'not exiting' diagnostic from init for a while
> 	myself.
> 
> Hi Doug,
> 
> What are "SWIs" ?

Its an ancient VAX concept - 'SoftWare Interrupts'. Basically on a vax,
you could poke a register and it would cause a low-priority interrupt.
They were often used for 'split priority' interrupt handlers where you
did the minimum amount of work in the first interrupt and then triggered
a SWI for the rest. The advantage being that the SWI could be pre-empted
by another high-priority hardware interrupt.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1068542054.24997.2.camel>