tech-kern archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Reviving SA: what is up with preempt() generating BLOCKED upcalls?

On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 12:35:23AM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote:
> On May 10, 2008, at 9:40 PM, Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:
> >As part of reviving SA, I'm re-adding all of the kernel  
> >infrastructure we
> >ripped out.
> >
> >In doing this, I looked at re-adding the preempt(int more) code we  
> >had.
> >However, I have serious questions about it. Like why do it?


> You went from LSONPROC to LSRUN and that's shouldn't cause an BLOCKED  
> upcall.
> I think a BLOCKED upcall should be sent iff the state changed to  
> I also think if a change to LSSTOP or LSSUSPENDED happens an upcall  
> should
> not be sent since an external party want the lwp/proc to stop  
> execution and
> switching to a new one to continue execution just seems wrong.

Ok. Sounds good. So I wasn't totally misunderstanding it. :-)

Take care,


Attachment: pgp7gzWOpiwA0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index