From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 29 14:33:03 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF68106564A; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:33:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A908FC16; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:33:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.101]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id RAA08209; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:33:00 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4E5BA31C.7070103@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:33:00 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110705 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hans Petter Selasky References: <201107132107.p6DL7ojq099900@svn.freebsd.org> <4E5B9334.5020502@FreeBSD.org> <201108291627.42477.hselasky@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201108291627.42477.hselasky@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org" , "svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org" , "src-committers@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: svn commit: r223989 - head/sys/dev/usb/input X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:33:04 -0000 on 29/08/2011 17:27 Hans Petter Selasky said the following: > On Monday 29 August 2011 15:25:08 Andriy Gapon wrote: >> Another question - why ukbd_yield() is needed? >> Why kern_yield() would not be good here? >> What are the priority manipulations in ukbd_yield? >> Not saying that the code is incorrect, just that this is not explained in >> the commit message. > > This is needed during mountroot prompt, to allow the worker threads of the USB > code to run, because the mountroot code is like: > > while (1) { > cngetc(); > } > > instead of: > > while (1) { > cngetc(); > pause("WAIT_A_BIT", 1); > } Not sure if this answers my question, which is not about pause vs ukbd_yield, but is about ukbd_yield vs kern_yield. In other words, why you couldn't simply use kern_yield where you used ukbd_yield? -- Andriy Gapon