Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:46:19 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, Jake Burkholder <jake@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys systm.h condvar.h src/sys/kern kern_ Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0107051143050.30393-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107041149280.11969-100000@beppo>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Imagine an interrupt between the wakeup and lock release. That would give > > plenty enough time for another CPU to grab the woken process and then block on > > the lock. > > John- show some numbers with even a 32 processor SGI that this happens > all that much. Yer reachin'.... I think that all John is saying that the possibility of taking an interrupt can make the size of the window large enough for another cpu (or for preemption on this cpu) to grab the woken process. I know from the original alpha port that in a buildworld, even 1-2 instruction windows can cause races. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Phone: +44 20 8348 6160 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.33.0107051143050.30393-100000>