Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:30:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: KSE signals (was RE: cvs commit: src/sys/ddb db_ps.csrc/sys/i386/i386 genassym.c) Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304101928290.4545-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304101613360.90002-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is NO support for locking a KSE to a CPU yet. That is a completely > > > > > different question. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is in ULE. > > > > > > But you keep your own information on this.. > > > > Yes, I'm telling you, if you add anything make it specific to the > > scheduler. It doesn't not need to be in scheduler independant code. We > > just need a new system call for binding a kse to a cpu. This will be > > scheduler independant and then we can call a scheduler dependant routine > > like sched_bind(kse, cpu); > > exactly my thought. This is all good stuff, but can we fix KSE signals first please? Pretty please??? -- Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10304101928290.4545-100000>